Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
MCD's male enrollment is not substantial. Neither is JC's. So them being among the top in many of major sports is impressive. They both seem to get a lot of bang for their buck.
StP used to have a lot of 2-way athletes, but that has fallen off greatly in the past decade or so.
Loyola and CH simply have too many kids to allow a ton of multiple sport athletes. If you go to those schools they ask kids to "focus" on one sport. It saves a roster spot and gives more kids in the school a chance to participate in a sport. I am not a fan of that, but I totally understand why they do it. Good to have more kids involved, I guess.

700 boys on campus = "male enrollment not substantial." Yeah OK.

McD has about 300 or less boys in the upper school - you're looking at numbers for K-12

It's not like some schools have 10,000 kids and others have 7. All of the "major" varsity coaches have jobs on the line and if they have to split a kid's time who is a serious contributor, they will and often do.......up to a point.

Looking at these numbers, I think it's actually impressive that the smaller schools are often dominant, it means that if you have 300 upper school boys, and you're MIAA-A, roughly 1/3 of the student body plays lax for the school (at some level). If you are a fan of the sport, that is just really cool. And I think these numbers point out that if you are CHC, LB, or Spalding, there is absolutely no reason for you to be finishing last in any MIAA sport. Ever.

The big boys:
CHC has 1200.
Loyola has 650-750 in the upper school, as high as 775 in 2021 I believe.
Spalding has 600 (boys)

The Rest:
Gilman has 450
John Carroll has 350 (boys).
BL has 300.
St. Pauls has 310.
St. Mary's has 250, sometimes fewer.
McD had 330 in 2021.

McD is not on some island of "Oh my gosh, how do they do it with so little!" But again, shame on the bigger schools for getting beat by these squads relatively frequently. LB's record this year definitely stands out.

You have this totally wrong. Starting with BL-the school only participates in a few A conference sports. There are several sports that they don't even field a team for and the rest of the sports they play in B conference.. They pick & choose, while the larger student bodies you mention(CHC, LB, Spalding & you forgot MSJ all play A) So the school is really all about lax as we know. Kids are bought lock stock & barrel-most of roster never sees the field however. McD, John Carroll(Football is B) & Gilman all play A conference sports. StM, StP & Severn are the carpet baggers that that are allowed to play A lax and B in everything else. So when you come on here and say the larger schools should never finish last, lets put all of these schools that are in A lax in the A conference for ALL sports and see who finishes last. Because you have more students, not mean all play sports. Furthermore, those school are trying to compete in A in just about every sport offered-filling many teams. Some smaller schools are sports academies with a school next door....
Loyola plays B conference football. Loyola lost to St. Mary's in football last year. Loyola beat A conference champ Calvert Hall in football last year. None of this has anything to do with lacrosse. Next you'll be talking about which robotics team competes in the top competitions or who has the best It's Academic squad. This is a lacrosse board and your retort to the bigger schools should be better at lacrosse is to say that the smaller schools should be better at all other sports? Strange.

FYI,
LB is playing in the A conference for the 2022 season. I think the comment about smaller schools having success in lax requires a conversation about MIAA sports in general and why that occurs vs. all sports played and the level they are played at. There is a reasons behind success or lack of that should be explored when a comment is made about big school vs. small. There is more to it.

Loyola (1200 boys, A conference FB aspirations) lost to StM (250 boys, solidly B conference for FB) two of the last three years. Draw your own conclusions from that but it is a legit datapoint.

Except that Loyola's 900-950 boys (not 1200) cover 6th-12th grade. So much for legit data points.

Ok, let’s try it again…

Loyola (750 boys, A conference FB aspirations) lost to StM (250 boys, solidly B conference for FB) two of the last three years. Draw your own conclusions from that but it is a legit datapoint.

Happy now, Don Nation?

I think nobody at LB is happy with that, which is why there's a new athletic director and likely soon a new coach.