US Lacrosse Community Forum Forums NORTHEAST LACROSSE BOTC MAIN FORUM (LI, CT, WC) Girls 2024-10th Grade Fall 2021/Summer 2022

A big part of the connections is made through coaches and recruiting directors. Another big piece of connections is where each recruiting classes predecessors land. For 2024s, that be the 23s. The 2023s will stick in coaches minds when looking into the 24s, the 24s for 25s etc.

YJ 2023:
Coastal
Pace
Brown
Hofstra
Cortland
Fairleigh Dickenson
High Point
Delaware
Binghamton
ASU
SB
Stanford
Florida
Lafayette
UMass Lowell
ECU
LIU
Yale
ND
BC

Jesters 2023:
Siena
Marist
Virginia Tech
Pace
Binghamton
Loyola
Jacksonville
UMass
BC
Syracuse

Liberty 2023:
Marist
Hofstra
Quinnipiac
U Chicago
Binghamton
Molloy

I don't see legacy online but they definitely have some.

Top Guns 2023:
Tampa
Binghamton
Villanova
ECU
Hofstra
Loyola
Georgetown
Stanford
Duke
UNC
UVA

91 2023:
Dominican College

Recon 2023:
None

Icon 2023:
None

Agree. My 2020 daughter's experience was ivies recruit as early as other D1 programs. She committed in 9th before the rule change and was contacted by some ivies early. I don't recall any D3 schools reaching out, I presume because she didn't pursue any and also because she was off the table before they started recruiting her class. A few of her friends went D3 or visited D3 schools. Some schools have admissions screening the summer before senior year and not all of the recruits makes it through. Some want junior year transcripts and test scores before offering, so it's June/July after junior year for commitments at the earliest.

Thank you.. Rules seem to slow down the process and clubs are less involved early on. Prior to rule changes so many girls would commit super early.
The clubs websites would show all the young girls and the verbal commits. It was a way to generate hype and get younger players to hopefully come to their club. This all meant $$.
Rules have changed. The recruiting is pushed back so that the girls can play and enjoy Youth and HS sports more . Now clubs try to generate news in other ways. You can see some of it on this site. Like saying schools have reached out to them and making them look special.
2024 Girls need to keep working hard to get on the colleges radar. It’s so early. Plenty of time to be seen and don’t sweat it. 2022 are still commiting and colleges are deeply involved in 2023 at the moment.

Love the advice. We see many 2022 girls still committing.
Colleges are in deep with 2023. 2024s don’t stress b/c it’s a long road ahead. Washington and Lee is having an ID camp and only 2022 and 2023 are invited. What does that tell you? There are several that are doing the same. Just because they allow you doesn’t mean they are looking at you. Enjoy the ride and don’t rush it.

I really don't think that this has anything to do with clubs. In my experience while some schools are swtill on other classes the next class is of interest to top programs.

Plenty of great quotes from that cult classic-
Fear causes hesitation and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true.

So don’t hesitate..2024 should be working to get noticed but don’t sweat if you aren’t getting what some are describing here. Early attention from an email invite to a college ID camp comes to anyone who makes contact. That is the job of many of these assistant coaches.
Spring and summer is the hot time for 2024 but sept 1 is not the end all. Still seeing 2022 commiting and colleges a looking hard at 2023. It’s a long road so enjoy it.

I agree , colleges recruit ‘players’ not ‘clubs’. It’s up to the girls to do the work and reach out to the schools. Schools are slowly collecting data on the sophmore class.
The post about some schools only letting 2022 and 23 at this point is interesting. I have seen that a few times also.

For anyone looking to play at a higher level post high school, so many great options. Programs at every level being added every day. It has to be the fastest growing sport and especially for women with Title 9. The first goal would be to get an education but why not have fun at the same time. Lacrosse may open up some doors for you so be diligent.
By 2024,,
124 D1
107 D2
294 D3
42 NAIA
Also, many clubs teams at great colleges. Some of them play at a high level. So, girls who don’t want to make the commitment can still play while getting an education.

The best clubs have lots of players. Watch the top schools go watch a girl and see handful of others they could recruit. Your quote about not recruiting clubs isn’t entirely true.

Obviously college coaches are going to watch the top club teams but they will "recruit" the player, not the club. Players on the top club teams will get more exposure especially to the stronger college programs but even on most the top club teams only a 5-7 players will receive offers from the top college programs.

I agree with you point about exposure but…
If you aren’t seeing the field u aren’t being seen, getting game experience or having any fun.

If your daughter is not getting playing time in the majority of game at tournaments you should be raising heck with the coach / director. This is pay to play and college coaches are on the sideline watching. College coaches could care less about who wins playing time should be close to equal in most games.

Exactly. Look at YJ, TG bottom of roster.

Sorry my original post about the club not mattering wasn’t in terms of the club having some pull in recruiting but that 24s being actively looked at is not a story told by clubs. It is very real and happening all fall and winter. Being on a good club team is extremely important. Schools they’ve been able to recruit to, amount of kids per team getting recruited, the skills being taught to players so they are recruitable. Better clubs make recruiting easier. If you’re on a weaker club team you can still get recruited if you’re a good player it’s just much harder without a good program name and connections backing you.

Actually a little surprised by the apparent lack of players committing to Top 20 type programs as well as lack of kids committing to for lack of a better term high academic schools. I would speculate that you do not have every 23 from the island but even so I thought we would see at least a few more go to the top programs as well as top academic schools.

This does not bode well for Long Island players or for your point that college coaches will look to the clubs they recruited from for the class of 2023 as a some sort of guide to what clubs they will recruit from for the 24s, 25's etc...

Most of the Top Programs are done or close to being done with their 23's and unfortunately Long Island appears to be under represented. I count 14 top tier lacrosse programs and another 3 top tier academic schools that are not top tier lacrosse.

Don’t play for an elite team then. The coaches want to see the best players not all players.

Don’t raise heck. The coach probably gave your daughter a chance to stay and be on a good team even though she isn’t as good as the top players. Take her to a club where she has a bigger role.

Who said the smaller or newer clubs don’t have the connections? All have connections from playing the game and also being recruited themselves…
some have college coaching experience and some are HS coaches.

Some of these clubs only care about the top girls or girls going to top schools that they can brag about on their websites. In this instance the HS coaches end up playing a.more prominent role.The club will always take credit despite sometimes doing nothing.

I agree with being with a top club early on and getting the best possible training but ok to move later on in order to get playing time.
Clubs still want to win and have politics so playing time/role is never equal. Many of these girls on the best teams get the pleasure of playing with the best in practice but very little game reps. This hurts their development and confidence….and exposure come now.

Plenty of good trainers around to help you sharper your game and get you ready. Some of them only train sooo have no conflict of interest issues and have plenty of connections to help recruits.

Ouch!! on the comment about LI not being represented well on top D1 or high academic. .Some of the info is Iinaccurate and skewed. Somebody put a lot of time into collecting this data but seems obvious what they are trying to do…with
one of the better clubs is barely mentioned and some of the smaller clubs that generally has a few D1 recruits isn’t mentioned either..
Plus some girls on not great clubs get help from HS coaches or trainers and that isn’t represented here.
I think the point was to say certain clubs are better than others but all clubs, HS Coaches and trainers have connections. Some of the colleges know about the politics with the clubs and would rather deal with HS coaches. Clubs charge a tremendous amt of money for their guidance and aren’t always necessary.
Too clubs only have so much band width to help everyone. Too Guns and YJ have been doing this for a very long time and still are turning out great recruiting classes. And this is despite everyone trying to poach their players.. A fair amount of other clubs top recruits were these girls.
If you look at D1 rosters Long Island is still a hot bed and well represented but generally does more in the Northeast or eastern seaboard. Players are coming from all over and this trend will continue which is great for the sport.

All valid points. But no need to panic but Schools are not done with 2023s. Girls are still committing daily and for some will go well into the summer and fall...
Top academic D3 do not settle until very late. LI kids will be going there for sure but won’t see it yet. A few of the high academic D3 are running camps and only inviting 2022 and 2023.

Not sure why one club is constantly trying to sell fake news. Do they think people will read and want to jump to them?

I keep reading about "connections", do you really believe recruiting is about connections? College coaches want the best players that they can get, they want players who can help their team compete. College coaches are not offering spots to players based on connections or what club the athlete plays for.

If the data that was presented is accurate at all it proves the point that college coaches go everywhere for their recruits, they do not simply go to certain clubs where they might have a connection. That is not to say that club affiliation is not important or that the clubs have no role in the recruiting process. Clubs provide a venue for players to compete/perform and for coaches to watch in order to evaluate and identify talent. The fact of the matter is that it's really about the player, not the particular club especially when looking at the most competitive college programs.

Connections absolutely help some girls get recruited. Especially onto high end academic schools. Look at the rosters for schools like Princeton, Yale, Stanford, Harvard, etc. You will see many names of girls who are average players with big connections. These girls will never see the field, and don’t care.

I would like to hear your insight on this comment that you made: "The recruiting process is not the same for all players nor is it the same for all coaches/programs. The North Carolina Coach and the players that UNC recruits will have a much different experience than the coaches at a mid-tier program and the players that they recruit."

This seems like a naive post. Of course connections matter in lax as they do in every area of life. Connections will help you get seen, even if you’re not ultimately given a spot. It at least gives you exposure when you have your club coaches vouching for you. It’s like getting interviews at top companies. Doesn’t mean you’ll get the offer but often, even getting an interview is hard.

Yes but many of the clubs on LI don’t help with the high academic D1 and certainly not the D3 high academic. The D3 high academic are too long of a process. The clubs want to market themselves immediately and can’t wait to put it up on their website. Many of these clubs may do a good job of developing talent but it’s extremely political. The politics are tough to navigate the entire time. When it comes to recruiting they only care about themselves. They look at the top girls and ignore from Middle to back of their roster and forget the B, C and D teams. Despite the fact the marketing plan is to fill a B team and that’s where they make their money they could give a garbage about them when it comes recruiting time. Some will publicize the garbage out of every aspect of the prospect just to get you thinking you need them or you should be unhappy where you are.

Ivy and NESCAC rosters have a lot girls from all over and especially prep schools.

Ok these are valid points. So is it better to keep an ok but not stud kid on an A team that plays in the best brackets or put them in a B team where they won’t even get looks because coaches assume they weren’t good enough to be on the A team? I’d rather my kid be with the best players so she can try to get better, but I empathize with them when they’re barely seeing the field.

You obviously do not understand how recruiting works, especially at the Ivy's and Stanford...

1 - There are many players on all teams at all levels who will never see the field.

2 - There are "average" players on all "average" teams which Harvard and Yale are.

3 - The average players at program like Princeton are there because they have incredible grades it's not because they have connections. Apparently you are not familiar with how the Academic Index works. Im sure Stanford has to balance out their recruiting class as well i.e. If Stanford's Number 1 recruit has a 92 GPA with a 29 ACT the coach will most likely need to bring in a recruit with significantly higher grades and test scores (just using random numbers, I do not know what Stanfords minimums are for athletes are) but I am pretty sure that the coach can not bring in 10 recruits all with minimum numbers.

The post is not naive at all. The post states "Clubs provide a venue for players to compete/perform and for coaches to watch in order to evaluate and identify talent." That venue is the exposure that you refer to at that point the coaches get to watch the kid play and they recruit based on the players athleticism and ability not because they know the club director. The analogy to a job interview is not apples to apples, it would be very rare for the employer/interviewer to be able to actually go and watch the potential hire perform. When a coach goes to watch a team play they see all of the players on the field, not just the ones someone asks them to look at.

Always funny to listen to how everything is about connections and political.... some of you believe that everything from UA to IL rankings to college recruiting is BS and political.

This. Stanford has two "exemptions" per class -- girls who don't count towards AI numbers. The rest need top grades -- needs to average out to an AI of around 3.85 unweighted with 1420 SAT. So for every recruit below that, you need one higher.

Exactly, it’s not about connections. It’s about their athletic/lacrosse ability as well as their academic credentials.

Having a billionaire dad with a big name in the lax community can’t hurt either!

The connections don't get you an offer, but they give you quicker and more honest feedback which is vital in a recruiting search, especially for a girl who isn't an UA 150 girls.

The weaker Ill connected clubs go to weaker tournaments and attract less coaches on sidelines: facts.

The connections do help get coaches to games an an upper hand if there are two equal players fighting over a spot on a roster.

Wow, some of you will never get it. Or should I say you will never admit that your opinion of your daughters lacrosse abilities may not be accurate. It’s not always about connections and politics.

Ivy and NESCAC rosters have a lot girls from all over and especially prep schools.[/quote]

Ok these are valid points. So is it better to keep an ok but not stud kid on an A team that plays in the best brackets or put them in a B team where they won’t even get looks because coaches assume they weren’t good enough to be on the A team? I’d rather my kid be with the best players so she can try to get better, but I empathize with them when they’re barely seeing the field.[/quote]

Just my opinion but define ok kid. Stud can play anywhere and get noticed. Earlier somebody asked how recruitment process different for some and how/why. Studs know by early summer their phone blowing up 9/1 and only tears shed are over which top school they score not if.
Ok kid playing say at least 1/3 of games? If not that’s really bad imo and a move maybe warranted. If playing day a 1/3 are they getting it done to an acceptable level of just surviving or say scoring empty net goals as 9th attacker fed from top 10 mid in nation?
The sooner you embrace reality the better it will be. Get on another solid A team or a Very good B with a top franchise. There are many with a couple on Long Island and tons elsewhere like Heroes M@D M&D untied Steps etc etc…
My point is you gotta PLAY! Most top players train outside travel so practices should be team concepts and game speed not catching ability.
PLAY! Many kids sit bench for years on top teams only to sit bench on top HS teams into say junior year. Lack of actual playing hinders their growth on the game field regardless of their abilities on the wall or backyard b-T-b’s.
I bet you’d be surprised how many very good players populate a few lesser franchise A teams and top travel B teams. Imo the kids playing game in game out at or just above their level and getting it done game after game do much better than being in the TOP Teams leaning on their sticks summer after summer and high school season after high school season.
Sooner or later they’ll have to perform in front of a college coach they want to impress whether at a tourney or a prospect camp. Sitting the bench all those summers won’t help and even if more schools at their games they don’t recruit if you aren’t playing.
Best luck all kids

Ok these are valid points. So is it better to keep an ok but not stud kid on an A team that plays in the best brackets or put them in a B team where they won’t even get looks because coaches assume they weren’t good enough to be on the A team? I’d rather my kid be with the best players so she can try to get better, but I empathize with them when they’re barely seeing the field.[/quote]

Just my opinion but define ok kid. Stud can play anywhere and get noticed. Earlier somebody asked how recruitment process different for some and how/why. Studs know by early summer their phone blowing up 9/1 and only tears shed are over which top school they score not if.
Ok kid playing say at least 1/3 of games? If not that’s really bad imo and a move maybe warranted. If playing day a 1/3 are they getting it done to an acceptable level of just surviving or say scoring empty net goals as 9th attacker fed from top 10 mid in nation?
The sooner you embrace reality the better it will be. Get on another solid A team or a Very good B with a top franchise. There are many with a couple on Long Island and tons elsewhere like Heroes M@D M&D untied Steps etc etc…
My point is you gotta PLAY! Most top players train outside travel so practices should be team concepts and game speed not catching ability.
PLAY! Many kids sit bench for years on top teams only to sit bench on top HS teams into say junior year. Lack of actual playing hinders their growth on the game field regardless of their abilities on the wall or backyard b-T-b’s.
I bet you’d be surprised how many very good players populate a few lesser franchise A teams and top travel B teams. Imo the kids playing game in game out at or just above their level and getting it done game after game do much better than being in the TOP Teams leaning on their sticks summer after summer and high school season after high school season.
Sooner or later they’ll have to perform in front of a college coach they want to impress whether at a tourney or a prospect camp. Sitting the bench all those summers won’t help and even if more schools at their games they don’t recruit if you aren’t playing.
Best luck all kids[/quote]

My daughter played on a top team, a great player but was not started in some games due to politics in my opinion. Why do I say this? She did not do all the “suggested” clinics. Yet she was put in when we were in championships?? She did get recruited by several top teams and is committed. So many strange shenanigans go on behind the scenes, you have no idea. I am so happy to be done with this, but am extremely sympathetic to the girls still in the recruiting process. It’s all so stressful. Please be careful and know that you are the only one who knows best for your daughter!

Just my opinion but define ok kid. Stud can play anywhere and get noticed. Earlier somebody asked how recruitment process different for some and how/why. Studs know by early summer their phone blowing up 9/1 and only tears shed are over which top school they score not if.
Ok kid playing say at least 1/3 of games? If not that’s really bad imo and a move maybe warranted. If playing day a 1/3 are they getting it done to an acceptable level of just surviving or say scoring empty net goals as 9th attacker fed from top 10 mid in nation?
The sooner you embrace reality the better it will be. Get on another solid A team or a Very good B with a top franchise. There are many with a couple on Long Island and tons elsewhere like Heroes M@D M&D untied Steps etc etc…
My point is you gotta PLAY! Most top players train outside travel so practices should be team concepts and game speed not catching ability.
PLAY! Many kids sit bench for years on top teams only to sit bench on top HS teams into say junior year. Lack of actual playing hinders their growth on the game field regardless of their abilities on the wall or backyard b-T-b’s.
I bet you’d be surprised how many very good players populate a few lesser franchise A teams and top travel B teams. Imo the kids playing game in game out at or just above their level and getting it done game after game do much better than being in the TOP Teams leaning on their sticks summer after summer and high school season after high school season.
Sooner or later they’ll have to perform in front of a college coach they want to impress whether at a tourney or a prospect camp. Sitting the bench all those summers won’t help and even if more schools at their games they don’t recruit if you aren’t playing.
Best luck all kids[/quote]

My daughter played on a top team, a great player but was not started in some games due to politics in my opinion. Why do I say this? She did not do all the “suggested” clinics. Yet she was put in when we were in championships?? She did get recruited by several top teams and is committed. So many strange shenanigans go on behind the scenes, you have no idea. I am so happy to be done with this, but am extremely sympathetic to the girls still in the recruiting process. It’s all so stressful. Please be careful and know that you are the only one who knows best for your daughter![/quote]

There is no doubt that politics has a great impact on this sport and some situations are worse that others. I guess it’s easy to ignore or deny when you are benefitting from it. If your kid is lights out it makes it easier but surely it’s never smooth sailing. I always tried to avoid parent head coaches as best I could but any parent coach can be a problem especially if their kid plays your kids position. Who’s training who and money exchanges also make it complicated. Some would say that this is how the world works but doesn’t mean it’s ok. We are talking about youth sports and a game. Heart breaking sometimes.

At what point is it not about politics and connections? When will some of you realize that you are not able to objectively evaluate your daughters athleticism or lacrosse ability? Since my oldest went through the process I have been hearing the same nonsense... 'it's the friends and family network", "her father is connected", "it's all political", "Daddy Coach", "pay to play", "she got the look because of her father" "her Coach / Director did nothing to help" etc... We are now talking about recruiting, we are talking about college coaches (top division I coaches in particular) and the athletes they recruit. Do you really believe that it's all political? Do you really believe that a coach can consistently field a competitive team by offering spots to the friends and family network or to politically connected players? It's bad enough when you complain about politics at the 6th grade level and who makes the YJ "A" Team, it gets worse when you complain about how political Under Armour Underclass / American Select is or how the Inside Lacrosse rankings are political but now we are talking about college recruiting and you still want to push the narrative that it's all about who you know. Give me a break, if your daughter gets on the field and plays in front of a coach at a tournament, camp, clinic, showcase or whatever and the coach is not interested it's not political, it's because the coach does not believe that your daughter can help the coaches program compete or the coach has other players ranked higher on their list.

The best college programs do an excellent job at identifying and recruiting the best players. How do I know this? I know it because they consistently win, they consistently outperform the rest of the programs and they do it because they have better players. Sorry, but Maryland gets better players than Marist, Carolina gets better players than Cornell, Boston College gets better players than Boston University etc... that's just reality, it's not about connections or politics it's about talent. BTW, it doesn't take a college coach very long to identify the players that they like, they can tell in a few minutes if the kid can play but remember, there are other players out there and the coach might believe the other players are stronger. The recruiting process will let you know just where your daughter stands in relation to other players. It's not about politics, connections, pay to play etc... it's about the athlete and her ability.

This