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 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.
