2020-2021 Women's Division I, II & III College Lacrosse Season

Use this thread to discuss the 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

It's looking like NCAA Spring sports is a 50/50 proposition right now. Do the schools extend another year in the event Spring sports are also cancelled?

It was a really dense idea for the NCAA to grant spring sport athletes from all 4 classes an extra year of eligibility because they missed a majority of their season. By their logic, all of the fall sports athletes now deserve an extra year for missing their season, too And if there is no spring season next year, the same lacrosse players who gained an extra year in April should be able to stockpile a 2nd year of eligibility. How about 3 more years if the cycle repeats itself in 2022? When does this madness stop?

Going to guess that your kid wasn't impacted by this. Typical

It should have been seniors only, no reason a freshman,soph or juniors needed to have a year tacked on.. it was a mistake and these repercussions are now going to be felt through all D-1 sports. it was a move based on emotion last year. it needs to be fixed now.

First off, its all divisions not just D1. And secondly, how do you propose they "fix this"??

Seniors only..

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

It's looking like NCAA Spring sports is a 50/50 proposition right now. Do the schools extend another year in the event Spring sports are also cancelled?

It was a really dense idea for the NCAA to grant spring sport athletes from all 4 classes an extra year of eligibility because they missed a majority of their season. By their logic, all of the fall sports athletes now deserve an extra year for missing their season, too And if there is no spring season next year, the same lacrosse players who gained an extra year in April should be able to stockpile a 2nd year of eligibility. How about 3 more years if the cycle repeats itself in 2022? When does this madness stop?

Going to guess that your kid wasn't impacted by this. Typical

It should have been seniors only, no reason a freshman,soph or juniors needed to have a year tacked on.. it was a mistake and these repercussions are now going to be felt through all D-1 sports. it was a move based on emotion last year. it needs to be fixed now.

First off, its all divisions not just D1. And secondly, how do you propose they "fix this"??

Seniors only..

Well it’s too late. It’s over. The NCAA is proposing the same thing for fall athletes too. Time to move on.

After listening to NCAA chief medical officer press conference and talking to several women’s lacrosse coaches across all divisions there is real concern for a spring season.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

It's looking like NCAA Spring sports is a 50/50 proposition right now. Do the schools extend another year in the event Spring sports are also cancelled?

It was a really dense idea for the NCAA to grant spring sport athletes from all 4 classes an extra year of eligibility because they missed a majority of their season. By their logic, all of the fall sports athletes now deserve an extra year for missing their season, too And if there is no spring season next year, the same lacrosse players who gained an extra year in April should be able to stockpile a 2nd year of eligibility. How about 3 more years if the cycle repeats itself in 2022? When does this madness stop?

Going to guess that your kid wasn't impacted by this. Typical

It should have been seniors only, no reason a freshman,soph or juniors needed to have a year tacked on.. it was a mistake and these repercussions are now going to be felt through all D-1 sports. it was a move based on emotion last year. it needs to be fixed now.

First off, its all divisions not just D1. And secondly, how do you propose they "fix this"??

Seniors only..

You fix it by not granting anyone the additional year. It stinks but does the high school senior get an additional year. Does anyone anywhere else? COVID stinks and if you cant play as a senior you graduate and hope to heck u had 3 great years. If you are a junior and you now miss two years you move on as well. For the record and before I get bashed. I am the parent of a senior in college (D1 player) who graduated and is moving on. I also have a sophomore in high school who missed his spring season. As a parent it was awful but we will all get through this and emotions are making decisions when they shouldn't. The best solution is no additional years for anyone bc the domino effect of incoming athletes and costs to programs are not worth it.

Originally Posted by baldbear

After listening to NCAA chief medical officer press conference and talking to several women’s lacrosse coaches across all divisions there is real concern for a spring season.

this post is depressing to read.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

After listening to NCAA chief medical officer press conference and talking to several women’s lacrosse coaches across all divisions there is real concern for a spring season.

this post is depressing to read.

Did you expect anything different. The NCAA is so far left did you expect an NCAA “doctor” to say let’s play. They are no different than the media. All you get/hear is the 1 sided argument they want you to hear.

I’m gonna get some heat but I can take it! You go to university to get educated and you play a sport, at whatever level. But you go to get educated. The NCAA allowing another year has nothing to do with education; it’s to appease the player and parent and big money sports. It makes a mess of university sports budgets.

Did seniors graduate and now pursuing a Masters Degree in their fifth year? A second major?

To be honest a vast majority of seniors did not take the fifth year. They graduated, got a job (hopefully) and moved on with their lives. It stinks that their athletic careers were cut short and they missed a formal graduation.

For the record I advised not offering the extra year to everyone. But that was big money sports driving that, not women’s lacrosse. Some student athletes were or are now in programs that can win a national championship. It’s their prerogative to stay and try and win a championship while taking classes in whatever. For very few the sport is bigger than the degree.

Originally Posted by baldbear

I’m gonna get some heat but I can take it! You go to university to get educated and you play a sport, at whatever level. But you go to get educated. The NCAA allowing another year has nothing to do with education; it’s to appease the player and parent and big money sports. It makes a mess of university sports budgets.

Did seniors graduate and now pursuing a Masters Degree in their fifth year? A second major?

To be honest a vast majority of seniors did not take the fifth year. They graduated, got a job (hopefully) and moved on with their lives. It stinks that their athletic careers were cut short and they missed a formal graduation.

For the record I advised not offering the extra year to everyone. But that was big money sports driving that, not women’s lacrosse. Some student athletes were or are now in programs that can win a national championship. It’s their prerogative to stay and try and win a championship while taking classes in whatever. For very few the sport is bigger than the degree.

Agree completely.

I happen to agree with your opinion that the NCAA shouldn't have given an extra year of eligibility to everyone. Just wondering how this is related to big money sports? To my knowledge, the NCAA decision only applies to spring sports. Men’s football and basketball are not played in the spring. What big money sports were involved?

Sorry. Got ahead of myself. If football goes the way of spring sports, which it appears it will, then revenue generating sports will be involved. I might have tipped my hand with that comment.

Just a point of reference. People say football and basketball pay for all other sports. The NCAA reported In 2015 only 24 FBS football programs were in the black. Almost all other football programs and basketball programs LOSE money. All universities subsidize their athletics. They invest in athletics” to provide educational value to student athletes and enhance overall campus life”. The NCAA reported that only 50% of the 128 top basketball programs are in the black. When coaches salaries, training complexes, and arenas are factored in only a handful of basketball programs generate a true surplus. It will be the college/university that determines whether to subsidize athletics not the football or basketball programs.

Well, NYIT cancelled all sports for the next two years. This will set a precedent with many private small schools. D2 athletics are in trouble.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just a point of reference. People say football and basketball pay for all other sports. The NCAA reported In 2015 only 24 FBS football programs were in the black. Almost all other football programs and basketball programs LOSE money. All universities subsidize their athletics. They invest in athletics” to provide educational value to student athletes and enhance overall campus life”. The NCAA reported that only 50% of the 128 top basketball programs are in the black. When coaches salaries, training complexes, and arenas are factored in only a handful of basketball programs generate a true surplus. It will be the college/university that determines whether to subsidize athletics not the football or basketball programs.

This is a great point and goes far beyond just lacrosse. So many of these D1 football universities have lost their season already. They will need to continue to pay monies for the things you mentioned above, i.e. - scholarships, staff, stadiums...etc. Now they are really in the RED. So many of these universities will need to make budget cuts and trim the so called fat. Take a school like USC, your football season was cancelled. USC has (25) D1 sports programs (11 Men & 14 Women). If this COVID trend continues I could see them cancelling half the programs. Take womens lacrosse, it has to be very expensive to field a team with no income coming in. I hope it does not happen, but we may see a lot of changes especially if this drags into the spring. NYIT, a small D2 program on Long Island just cancelled all sports for at least (2) years. Sadly they will not be the last to do this....

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well, NYIT cancelled all sports for the next two years. This will set a precedent with many private small schools. D2 athletics are in trouble.

densest athletics move so far during this pandemic. Closing for 2 years makes no sense unless NYIT was looking to shutter and greatly cut athletics anyway and is using this as an out.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well, NYIT cancelled all sports for the next two years. This will set a precedent with many private small schools. D2 athletics are in trouble.

densest athletics move so far during this pandemic. Closing for 2 years makes no sense unless NYIT was looking to shutter and greatly cut athletics anyway and is using this as an out.

What NYIT did was wrong. Waiting till end of August to inform players that they cancelled sports is terrible. They will never recover. What player will go there.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well, NYIT cancelled all sports for the next two years. This will set a precedent with many private small schools. D2 athletics are in trouble.

densest athletics move so far during this pandemic. Closing for 2 years makes no sense unless NYIT was looking to shutter and greatly cut athletics anyway and is using this as an out.

What NYIT did was wrong. Waiting till end of August to inform players that they cancelled sports is terrible. They will never recover. What player will go there.

Really a bad move, they may very well follow the path of Dowling and close down completely. Terrible for those kids who are athletes there or were hoping to be student-athletes there.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well, NYIT cancelled all sports for the next two years. This will set a precedent with many private small schools. D2 athletics are in trouble.

densest athletics move so far during this pandemic. Closing for 2 years makes no sense unless NYIT was looking to shutter and greatly cut athletics anyway and is using this as an out.

What NYIT did was wrong. Waiting till end of August to inform players that they cancelled sports is terrible. They will never recover. What player will go there.

Really a bad move, they may very well follow the path of Dowling and close down completely. Terrible for those kids who are athletes there or were hoping to be student-athletes there.

D2 athletics is in trouble is the most ridiculous comment I've seen in quite some time. The loss of revenue for these schools affects ALL schools every every level....some more than others. It doesnt mean D2 athletics is in trouble....silly comment. And yes, I agree completely that NYIT handled this horribly by waiting to the very last minute. I feel bad for all the athletes there but especially the incoming freshmen. You're right, this has Dowling written all over it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well, NYIT cancelled all sports for the next two years. This will set a precedent with many private small schools. D2 athletics are in trouble.

densest athletics move so far during this pandemic. Closing for 2 years makes no sense unless NYIT was looking to shutter and greatly cut athletics anyway and is using this as an out.

What NYIT did was wrong. Waiting till end of August to inform players that they cancelled sports is terrible. They will never recover. What player will go there.

Really a bad move, they may very well follow the path of Dowling and close down completely. Terrible for those kids who are athletes there or were hoping to be student-athletes there.

D2 athletics is in trouble is the most ridiculous comment I've seen in quite some time. The loss of revenue for these schools affects ALL schools every every level....some more than others. It doesnt mean D2 athletics is in trouble....silly comment. And yes, I agree completely that NYIT handled this horribly by waiting to the very last minute. I feel bad for all the athletes there but especially the incoming freshmen. You're right, this has Dowling written all over it.

Not really, most D2 programs are small private schools. No state funding means private donors. Economy is struggling, trouble.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well, NYIT cancelled all sports for the next two years. This will set a precedent with many private small schools. D2 athletics are in trouble.

densest athletics move so far during this pandemic. Closing for 2 years makes no sense unless NYIT was looking to shutter and greatly cut athletics anyway and is using this as an out.

What NYIT did was wrong. Waiting till end of August to inform players that they cancelled sports is terrible. They will never recover. What player will go there.

Really a bad move, they may very well follow the path of Dowling and close down completely. Terrible for those kids who are athletes there or were hoping to be student-athletes there.

D2 athletics is in trouble is the most ridiculous comment I've seen in quite some time. The loss of revenue for these schools affects ALL schools every every level....some more than others. It doesnt mean D2 athletics is in trouble....silly comment. And yes, I agree completely that NYIT handled this horribly by waiting to the very last minute. I feel bad for all the athletes there but especially the incoming freshmen. You're right, this has Dowling written all over it.

Not really, most D2 programs are small private schools. No state funding means private donors. Economy is struggling, trouble.

There are many D1 and D3 private schools as well. Not all of them are funded so I stand by my comment....

Molloy made major financial changes to their athletic department. Private schools with light endowments are in trouble.

The recent news that SUNY Schools will have financial deficits and must cut costs could be influential to SUNY sports teams. From an academic perspective it will be easy for a school president to suspend sports to alleviate budget issues. Enrollment at SUNY schools is 30% lower per the article, with much of that out of state and international students. It’s amazing how many aspects of college life has been affected by COVID. So don’t be surprised if the SUNY sports schedule is suspended until Fall 2021.

Originally Posted by baldbear

The recent news that SUNY Schools will have financial deficits and must cut costs could be influential to SUNY sports teams. From an academic perspective it will be easy for a school president to suspend sports to alleviate budget issues. Enrollment at SUNY schools is 30% lower per the article, with much of that out of state and international students. It’s amazing how many aspects of college life has been affected by COVID. So don’t be surprised if the SUNY sports schedule is suspended until Fall 2021.

Soooo. Let’s be clear. You are saying the entire SUNY college sports system will be suspended till fall 2021. If that happens there will be no competitive SUNY sports teams going forward. And all the aspects of college students lives?? Are you not watching college football. Even the Uber left wing liberal pac-12 has rescheduled football. Your constant harping on this issue makes me think you are hoping sports are cancelled. Maybe there are many who are not willing to give up college sports and wear a muzzle every time they leave their home.

You can’t compare SUNY sports to the PAC-10 football. No SUNY teams are at a national level like PAC-10, SEC or any conference playing football. If SUNY has to make cuts it may start with non-academic programs.

Originally Posted by baldbear

You can’t compare SUNY sports to the PAC-10 football. No SUNY teams are at a national level like PAC-10, SEC or any conference playing football. If SUNY has to make cuts it may start with non-academic programs.

So quick google search. SUNY has 85 div 1 sports teams and 290 div 3 sports teams and 385 NJCAA teams. Some quick math shows 675 teams that are non scholarship. MOST of SUNY athletes PAY to play on their college team. SUNY should be looking at the overpriced academic professors who teach very little yet garner high salaries. In addition SUNY should be looking to enroll NY and US students instead of overseas students.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

The recent news that SUNY Schools will have financial deficits and must cut costs could be influential to SUNY sports teams. From an academic perspective it will be easy for a school president to suspend sports to alleviate budget issues. Enrollment at SUNY schools is 30% lower per the article, with much of that out of state and international students. It’s amazing how many aspects of college life has been affected by COVID. So don’t be surprised if the SUNY sports schedule is suspended until Fall 2021.

Soooo. Let’s be clear. You are saying the entire SUNY college sports system will be suspended till fall 2021. If that happens there will be no competitive SUNY sports teams going forward. And all the aspects of college students lives?? Are you not watching college football. Even the Uber left wing liberal pac-12 has rescheduled football. Your constant harping on this issue makes me think you are hoping sports are cancelled. Maybe there are many who are not willing to give up college sports and wear a muzzle every time they leave their home.

Just a gut feeling but IMHO it is very likely that we will see major cuts to SUNY Athletic programs. SUNY missed the boat a long time ago on all fronts and for whatever reason has never been able to catch up. NY politicians and SUNY administrators dropped the ball on all fronts (academics, athletics, social life etc...). We do not compete with any of the best State Universities academically, athletically or the overall college experience. We also lag behind in "campus beauty".

It’s not just scholarships. It’s the cost of away games; hotels, buses, food allotments. Multiply that by the number of programs you noted. It is a lot of money.

We did an analysis of NCAA program costs. Do you know who specifically was the highest university expense? Hampton Inn. More NCAA program dollars went to the Hampton Inn than any other expense.

Think of how many lacrosse contests are made on a given weekend day; half of those teams travelled. Hotel, food, buses, insurance...it adds up.

Then add all the other sports....

Originally Posted by baldbear

It’s not just scholarships. It’s the cost of away games; hotels, buses, food allotments. Multiply that by the number of programs you noted. It is a lot of money.

We did an analysis of NCAA program costs. Do you know who specifically was the highest university expense? Hampton Inn. More NCAA program dollars went to the Hampton Inn than any other expense.

Think of how many lacrosse contests are made on a given weekend day; half of those teams travelled. Hotel, food, buses, insurance...it adds up.

Then add all the other sports....

College sports teams are given a budget and spreadsheet each year. They are expected to stay within budget. The items you mentioned along with other requirements (uniforms, equipment) are all factored in. As you should be aware travel expenses will decline this year since team travel and schedules will be curtailed. A quick review of college teams cut indicates only 1 college-Furman cut lacrosse. The most cut sports are tennis-20, swimming and diving-11 and indoor track-5. Again I’m puzzled by your pessimistic comments regarding college athletics. Obviously you follow this sport and should recognize the positives of student athletes participating in the college sport environment. Regarding SUNY, having a feeling isn’t really a fact based discussion.

I’m very involved in the collegiate aspect of lacrosse. I’m also pessimistic about SUNY as I have seen how they operate with regards to collegiate sports. You can throw the budget and spreadsheets in the trash can. SUNY has a $900 million shortfall to fill and the governor has given each school a directive to cut their costs. Albany and Stony Brook have the two biggest shortfalls. They haven’t announced how they are going to cut their budgets but I have a “feeling” sports MAY be part of the process.

_______________________________________________________________

Stony Brook University spent $8,210,055 on men's teams and received $3,643,116 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave male athletes $9,751 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for men's teams. On average they make $135,748. They are supported by 24 assistant coaches who earn $47,924 on average.

Stony Brook University spent $4,799,904 on women's teams and received $1,350,420 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave female athletes $11,927 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for women's teams. They make, on average, $79,794. They are supported by 15 assistant coaches who earn, on average, $32,844.

_______________________________________________________________

If you are president of the university these are net-negative numbers. As a positive aside, the women are getting more funding than the men.

LaSalle is cutting 7 sports so we are seeing a trend but lacrosse is not one of them and does not seem to be a sport on the chopping block for schools that have eliminated sports to date with the exception of Furman.

Originally Posted by baldbear

I’m very involved in the collegiate aspect of lacrosse. I’m also pessimistic about SUNY as I have seen how they operate with regards to collegiate sports. You can throw the budget and spreadsheets in the trash can. SUNY has a $900 million shortfall to fill and the governor has given each school a directive to cut their costs. Albany and Stony Brook have the two biggest shortfalls. They haven’t announced how they are going to cut their budgets but I have a “feeling” sports MAY be part of the process.

_______________________________________________________________

Stony Brook University spent $8,210,055 on men's teams and received $3,643,116 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave male athletes $9,751 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for men's teams. On average they make $135,748. They are supported by 24 assistant coaches who earn $47,924 on average.

Stony Brook University spent $4,799,904 on women's teams and received $1,350,420 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave female athletes $11,927 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for women's teams. They make, on average, $79,794. They are supported by 15 assistant coaches who earn, on average, $32,844.

_______________________________________________________________

If you are president of the university these are net-negative numbers. As a positive aside, the women are getting more funding than the men.

Good discussion. As I’m sure you read SBU will have football with a CAA schedule in the spring. Leads one to believe that CAA will have conference games. College sports ....Bottom line all lose money for their respective school. Their function is not to make money. There may/will be cutbacks. But I disagree with your initial premiss that the sky is falling and no SUNY sports for another year.

First off I’ve never really put my thoughts down in a note so forgive some of the naivety- A few questions where I have no idea where to ask-I have a high school soph and we are ready to pull the trigger and start contacting for recruiting.. I also should add that our club has helped us but I have some questions I don’t feel like asking our club.
Are any schools hosting campus visits/open houses for prospective students? (Not just athletes) I’m aware of the virtual visits.
If we visit a school on our own should we register as a visitor first? We almost used a day this past weekend to drive two hours and to hit some schools but we weren’t sure if our visit should be official or not? (Again not as an athlete)
We live in a “target rich environment” so we have seen many campuses through festivals, clinics or camps but have never been officially registered for a visit. I want to officially start visiting other schools on our radar so my daughter knows what to strive/work for. She’s not going to Hopkins and Goucher's way too small and not remote enough for example.
I’m familiar with the rules but the pace of the the 22’s recruiting has us anxious. We lost this summers camps so we are that much farther behind. I know that we have tape on our side but my daughter need to get out there beyond what we’ve seen so this process becomes real.
Another example is that there’s a school in our family on our radar that is Div 1 but is never at any showcases, tournaments etc. they don't have summer camps. I guess they just send in coaches when needed to recruit? I guess with tape they don’t need to travel or hold live events? Does this have a reflection on their operation?

Lets See if I can help you...

1-A few questions where I have no idea where to ask-I have a high school soph and we are ready to pull the trigger and start contacting for recruiting.. You can contact all the coaches you want ( D-1 & D-2) they will not contact you back until 9/1/2021 .. if ever.

2- Are any schools hosting campus visits/open houses for prospective students? (Not just athletes) I’m aware of the virtual visits. Nope... Not until Covid is gone.. your guess is as good as any as to when that might happen..

3-If we visit a school on our own should we register as a visitor first? We almost used a day this past weekend to drive two hours and to hit some schools but we weren’t sure if our visit should be official or not? (Again not as an athlete) All Campus's are closed to visitors during the Covid Crisis.. you can probably walk around outside and maybe sneak into a building or two, but there are no sanctioned visits occurring. An "Official recruiting" visit is very different then you driving to
a school and walking around..again no coaches are going to talk recruiting to a 2023 at this time

4-We live in a “target rich environment” so we have seen many campuses through festivals, clinics or camps but have never been officially registered for a visit. I want to officially start visiting other schools on our radar so my daughter knows what to strive/work for. She’s not going to Hopkins and Goucher's way too small and not remote enough for example. You are confused about what an Official Visit is, you should do some online research to get a clearer understanding... you need to be invited to an Official Visit. There are no limits on how many visits you can make to a school if you are not receiving athletic scholarship money.. if your daughter wants to go to Maryland ( and it was open) you could go there every day for a year, once you add the athletic scholarship part into the equation then the rules apply about the number of visits you can make.

5-Another example is that there’s a school in our family on our radar that is Div 1 but is never at any showcases, tournaments etc. they don't have summer camps. I guess they just send in coaches when needed to recruit? I guess with tape they don’t need to travel or hold live events? Does this have a reflection on their operation? Id be curios to know who this mystery school is and are they competitive with such a laid back attitude. If I had to guess they are out there doing their recruiting diligence but you are missing the events they are holding or attending. follow their social media, they often post events they are planning to attend there.

You should really speak to your club director.. you pay them to help answer your questions.

The NESCAC has canceled the winter sports season. One of the factors is the 14 day quarantine in place in NY (which hopefully gets better, but who knows). So if a team goes to a quarantine state they have to self isolate for 14 days. That kills the season. Let’s hope by spring this will not be an issue.

Originally Posted by baldbear

The NESCAC has canceled the winter sports season. One of the factors is the 14 day quarantine in place in NY (which hopefully gets better, but who knows). So if a team goes to a quarantine state they have to self isolate for 14 days. That kills the season. Let’s hope by spring this will not be an issue.

Meanwhile every girls club team is out playing daily. When is someone going to start questioning the insanity of universities not playing ?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

The NESCAC has canceled the winter sports season. One of the factors is the 14 day quarantine in place in NY (which hopefully gets better, but who knows). So if a team goes to a quarantine state they have to self isolate for 14 days. That kills the season. Let’s hope by spring this will not be an issue.

Meanwhile every girls club team is out playing daily. When is someone going to start questioning the insanity of universities not playing ?

These are left wing colleges in left wing States. This nonsense will not stop because in the end these liberal colleges don’t care about students. They continue to overcharge parents/students.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

The NESCAC has canceled the winter sports season. One of the factors is the 14 day quarantine in place in NY (which hopefully gets better, but who knows). So if a team goes to a quarantine state they have to self isolate for 14 days. That kills the season. Let’s hope by spring this will not be an issue.

Meanwhile every girls club team is out playing daily. When is someone going to start questioning the insanity of universities not playing ?

Or question the insanity that every girls club team IS out playing daily. Yes, I choose to bring my daughter, but doesn't mean I am not insane for doing so.

Do you really feel your daughter is at dire risk going to practice. "insane for taking her" is a little over the top. Meanwhile most high school sports are being played in most states and do not have to wear masks at practice or during games and somehow the world is not imploding yet most college teams have to practice is masks.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Do you really feel your daughter is at dire risk going to practice. "insane for taking her" is a little over the top. Meanwhile most high school sports are being played in most states and do not have to wear masks at practice or during games and somehow the world is not imploding yet most college teams have to practice is masks.

If I thought it was insane I wouldn’t bring her. My point is no one knows. If my daughter gets seriously ill b/c I bring her to lax, I am insane. If this ends up having already peaked and not a big deal going forward then the colleges are insane for cancelling. The point is you don’t know, I don’t know and only time will tell.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Do you really feel your daughter is at dire risk going to practice. "insane for taking her" is a little over the top. Meanwhile most high school sports are being played in most states and do not have to wear masks at practice or during games and somehow the world is not imploding yet most college teams have to practice is masks.

If I thought it was insane I wouldn’t bring her. My point is no one knows. If my daughter gets seriously ill b/c I bring her to lax, I am insane. If this ends up having already peaked and not a big deal going forward then the colleges are insane for cancelling. The point is you don’t know, I don’t know and only time will tell.

Actually just look at CDC data. It says there are barely none hospitalizations for anyone under 70. Science

Just a point of reference and what college administrators are dealing with. SUNY Cortland has shutdown as a result of breaching a certain number of cases. So they are shut down for two weeks. How can you start a sports season with this in place?

D1 Final Four locations announced through 2026. No New York locations-Towson, Baltimore, Cary, Foxborough.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Thought this list was interesting... a men's and women's lacrosse Top 10's of "Programs That Inspire"... Adelphi was an easy choice...

Women's Top 5

1. Middlebury College (VT, NCAA Division 3)
2. Adelphi University (NY, NCAA Division 2)
3. Salisbury University (MD, NCAA Division 3)
4. Gettysburg College (PA, NCAA Division 3)
5. West Chester University (PA, NCAA Division 2)

I’m sure you realize that was an advertisement not a fact based evaluation.

Fresno State is first D1 school to cut women's lacrosse lets hope this is not a trend. https://www.fresnobee.com/sports/college/mountain-west/fresno-state/article246504080.html

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Thought this list was interesting... a men's and women's lacrosse Top 10's of "Programs That Inspire"... Adelphi was an easy choice...

Women's Top 5

1. Middlebury College (VT, NCAA Division 3)
2. Adelphi University (NY, NCAA Division 2)
3. Salisbury University (MD, NCAA Division 3)
4. Gettysburg College (PA, NCAA Division 3)
5. West Chester University (PA, NCAA Division 2)

I’m sure you realize that was an advertisement not a fact based evaluation.

so which program got left out and gave you the sads?

I heard the invites for Women’s USA Team went out. Does anyone have the list or know the players? Any surprises?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I heard the invites for Women’s USA Team went out. Does anyone have the list or know the players? Any surprises?

I am sure we will hear complaints from the usual suspects. I am also sure that the 72 players that have been selected to tryout are all excellent players. We will hear complaints when they narrow the field to the 36 player training roster and again when the Final USA Team Roster is announced. Good luck to all who have been selected and congratulations!

Just saw on US a lax page only taking 50 players for tryouts. Announced 10/22. Probably the correct number so only the best of the best in Pro and players that played college are selected.

I never write into this site but felt compelled to do so. Spallina should be embarrassed of himself and so should Levy for allowing it. You have one kid on the entire list who has never played a college game and her only accolade is her new coach has no shame and showed who is actually running the tryouts. Has Stony Brook even been practicing for Spallina to have seen her play and what kind of joke committee lets him get away with it. I was going to say before daddy comes on to claim sour grapes blah blah but even he would not try to justify this in any way. Whats the most disgusting about the whole thing is she actually took the spot of some very deserving player , not that USlacrosse cares but people should let them know it tarnishes the whole process.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I never write into this site but felt compelled to do so. Spallina should be embarrassed of himself and so should Levy for allowing it. You have one kid on the entire list who has never played a college game and her only accolade is her new coach has no shame and showed who is actually running the tryouts. Has Stony Brook even been practicing for Spallina to have seen her play and what kind of joke committee lets him get away with it. I was going to say before daddy comes on to claim sour grapes blah blah but even he would not try to justify this in any way. Whats the most disgusting about the whole thing is she actually took the spot of some very deserving player , not that USlacrosse cares but people should let them know it tarnishes the whole process.

I usually defend tryouts and the selection of players to various teams but I have to admit that this is a bit much. Is it possible that there was a limited pool of applicants?

So 49 deserving players made the tryout team congratulations and Good Luck.

1 is a complete joke and took a spot for someone at the midfield.

I would think we all need to questions the ethics of Us Lacrosse, Jenny Levy, Joe Spallina and Alex Frank. Along with selection committee.

If your an adult and can’t make a fair decision you shouldn’t take the job.

did ya ever think that some girls said No? could they have offered other girls whose lives have moved on from lacrosse the opportunity but they passed on it.. ya know like maybe job commitments, covid concerns, or maybe they're afraid they put in all the time and energy and the event gets cancelled anyway?
the list is the list, good on those that made it.

Nice try. I know for a fact that there are college All Americans that applied and did not get an invite. There are always politics in sports but this might be the worse I have ever seen.

Nice try. I know several college All Americans that are incredible players that applied and did not get an invite. The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA. There are always politics in sports but this is about the worse I have ever seen.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Nice try. I know several college All Americans that are incredible players that applied and did not get an invite. The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA. There are always politics in sports but this is about the worse I have ever seen.

I agree that the selection is a bit off... that said, "The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA" ... I am pretty sure she was named to the Under Armour Senior Girls All-American Team.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So 49 deserving players made the tryout team congratulations and Good Luck.

1 is a complete joke and took a spot for someone at the midfield.

I would think we all need to questions the ethics of Us Lacrosse, Jenny Levy, Joe Spallina and Alex Frank. Along with selection committee.

If your an adult and can’t make a fair decision you shouldn’t take the job.

USL is ALL about politics and not talent. Happens every tryout on both the men’s and woman side. They play favorites for sure. They also constantly claim they’re trying to “grow” the sport. A complete joke. They use your mandatory donations to subsidize their USA teams which play non competitive schedules. They should have figured out a way to enforce age restrictions for youth many years ago but did nothing. I would never give them a cent!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So 49 deserving players made the tryout team congratulations and Good Luck.

1 is a complete joke and took a spot for someone at the midfield.

I would think we all need to questions the ethics of Us Lacrosse, Jenny Levy, Joe Spallina and Alex Frank. Along with selection committee.

If your an adult and can’t make a fair decision you shouldn’t take the job.

USL is ALL about politics and not talent. Happens every tryout on both the men’s and woman side. They play favorites for sure. They also constantly claim they’re trying to “grow” the sport. A complete joke. They use your mandatory donations to subsidize their USA teams which play non competitive schedules. They should have figured out a way to enforce age restrictions for youth many years ago but did nothing. I would never give them a cent!

To state “USL is all about politics and not talent” That statement is not accurate. A couple of questionable selections does not make the entire process “political”.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

did ya ever think that some girls said No? could they have offered other girls whose lives have moved on from lacrosse the opportunity but they passed on it.. ya know like maybe job commitments, covid concerns, or maybe they're afraid they put in all the time and energy and the event gets cancelled anyway?
the list is the list, good on those that made it.

Actually got a response from US lacrosse while they wouldnt respond to particular players they said ALL players had to have registered for this particular event and there was a panel of 20+ coaches that selected and rated each position. Players were picked in rank order attack was by far most heavily populated position followed by Defense and midfielders then goalies May not believe them but at least got a legitimate response

US lax has no clue. They rely on the coaches to at least be some what fair.

There is no way you can say this was not done on purpose by Joey, and unfortunately his asst coach Levy(jk) And Frank allowed it . Player is a very good ball player but not even close to this level, as no 2020 is at this time. Hardly any 2019 are good enough.

So at the end question them as they presented it to US lax for truly a rubber stamp. Not to say US lax should have verified it but top people at USLax could care.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

I’m very involved in the collegiate aspect of lacrosse. I’m also pessimistic about SUNY as I have seen how they operate with regards to collegiate sports. You can throw the budget and spreadsheets in the trash can. SUNY has a $900 million shortfall to fill and the governor has given each school a directive to cut their costs. Albany and Stony Brook have the two biggest shortfalls. They haven’t announced how they are going to cut their budgets but I have a “feeling” sports MAY be part of the process.

_______________________________________________________________

Stony Brook University spent $8,210,055 on men's teams and received $3,643,116 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave male athletes $9,751 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for men's teams. On average they make $135,748. They are supported by 24 assistant coaches who earn $47,924 on average.

Stony Brook University spent $4,799,904 on women's teams and received $1,350,420 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave female athletes $11,927 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for women's teams. They make, on average, $79,794. They are supported by 15 assistant coaches who earn, on average, $32,844.

_______________________________________________________________

If you are president of the university these are net-negative numbers. As a positive aside, the women are getting more funding than the men.

Good discussion. As I’m sure you read SBU will have football with a CAA schedule in the spring. Leads one to believe that CAA will have conference games. College sports ....Bottom line all lose money for their respective school. Their function is not to make money. There may/will be cutbacks. But I disagree with your initial premiss that the sky is falling and no SUNY sports for another year.

As I am sure many have heard a few Ivy league have announced NO winter sports I have a feeling that this will soon apply to spring sports as well what a complete mess this will be

As I am sure many have heard a few Ivy league have announced NO winter sports I have a feeling that this will soon apply to spring sports as well what a complete mess this will be[/quote]

I agree. ;0(

Originally Posted by Anonymous

As I am sure many have heard a few Ivy league have announced NO winter sports I have a feeling that this will soon apply to spring sports as well what a complete mess this will be

I agree. ;0([/quote]

Agree There will not be an Ivy season maybe not one for anyone

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

I’m very involved in the collegiate aspect of lacrosse. I’m also pessimistic about SUNY as I have seen how they operate with regards to collegiate sports. You can throw the budget and spreadsheets in the trash can. SUNY has a $900 million shortfall to fill and the governor has given each school a directive to cut their costs. Albany and Stony Brook have the two biggest shortfalls. They haven’t announced how they are going to cut their budgets but I have a “feeling” sports MAY be part of the process.

_______________________________________________________________

Stony Brook University spent $8,210,055 on men's teams and received $3,643,116 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave male athletes $9,751 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for men's teams. On average they make $135,748. They are supported by 24 assistant coaches who earn $47,924 on average.

Stony Brook University spent $4,799,904 on women's teams and received $1,350,420 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave female athletes $11,927 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for women's teams. They make, on average, $79,794. They are supported by 15 assistant coaches who earn, on average, $32,844.

_______________________________________________________________

If you are president of the university these are net-negative numbers. As a positive aside, the women are getting more funding than the men.

Good discussion. As I’m sure you read SBU will have football with a CAA schedule in the spring. Leads one to believe that CAA will have conference games. College sports ....Bottom line all lose money for their respective school. Their function is not to make money. There may/will be cutbacks. But I disagree with your initial premiss that the sky is falling and no SUNY sports for another year.

As I am sure many have heard a few Ivy league have announced NO winter sports I have a feeling that this will soon apply to spring sports as well what a complete mess this will be

Lets see what happens in the election

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Nice try. I know several college All Americans that are incredible players that applied and did not get an invite. The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA. There are always politics in sports but this is about the worse I have ever seen.

I agree that the selection is a bit off... that said, "The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA" ... I am pretty sure she was named to the Under Armour Senior Girls All-American Team.

Ohhhh. HS AA means something when they are playing in college. And there you have it. On many a threads the player bio seems to mean something. So that’s why we are where we are when it comes down to selecting UA teams and HS AA. When you distill it down, the same few (mainly 1 person) gets to stack those teams with marginal players from her team/org who then pack their player bio’s with nonsense. What garbage.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

did ya ever think that some girls said No? could they have offered other girls whose lives have moved on from lacrosse the opportunity but they passed on it.. ya know like maybe job commitments, covid concerns, or maybe they're afraid they put in all the time and energy and the event gets canceled anyway?
the list is the list, good on those that made it.

Actually got a response from US lacrosse while they wouldn't respond to particular players they said ALL players had to have registered for this particular event and there was a panel of 20+ coaches that selected and rated each position. Players were picked in rank order attack was by far the most heavily populated position followed by Defense and midfielders then goalies May not believe them but at least got a legitimate response

Where did you contact US lacrosse to get this response? There is no way this was not all about Spallina pushing his agenda. The player in question's biggest accolade is UA senior AA in a season that was not played. If you are trying to justify this selection there is no possible way any reasonable person can. Sorry but US lacrosse , Levy and Spallina should be ashamed they took a spot from a deserving player so Spallina can push his agenda.

Well looks like proud mommy. Embarrassing to be honest.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

I’m very involved in the collegiate aspect of lacrosse. I’m also pessimistic about SUNY as I have seen how they operate with regards to collegiate sports. You can throw the budget and spreadsheets in the trash can. SUNY has a $900 million shortfall to fill and the governor has given each school a directive to cut their costs. Albany and Stony Brook have the two biggest shortfalls. They haven’t announced how they are going to cut their budgets but I have a “feeling” sports MAY be part of the process.

_______________________________________________________________

Stony Brook University spent $8,210,055 on men's teams and received $3,643,116 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave male athletes $9,751 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for men's teams. On average they make $135,748. They are supported by 24 assistant coaches who earn $47,924 on average.

Stony Brook University spent $4,799,904 on women's teams and received $1,350,420 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave female athletes $11,927 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for women's teams. They make, on average, $79,794. They are supported by 15 assistant coaches who earn, on average, $32,844.

_______________________________________________________________

If you are president of the university these are net-negative numbers. As a positive aside, the women are getting more funding than the men.

Good discussion. As I’m sure you read SBU will have football with a CAA schedule in the spring. Leads one to believe that CAA will have conference games. College sports ....Bottom line all lose money for their respective school. Their function is not to make money. There may/will be cutbacks. But I disagree with your initial premiss that the sky is falling and no SUNY sports for another year.

As I am sure many have heard a few Ivy league have announced NO winter sports I have a feeling that this will soon apply to spring sports as well what a complete mess this will be

Lets see what happens in the election

TRUTH

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

I’m very involved in the collegiate aspect of lacrosse. I’m also pessimistic about SUNY as I have seen how they operate with regards to collegiate sports. You can throw the budget and spreadsheets in the trash can. SUNY has a $900 million shortfall to fill and the governor has given each school a directive to cut their costs. Albany and Stony Brook have the two biggest shortfalls. They haven’t announced how they are going to cut their budgets but I have a “feeling” sports MAY be part of the process.

_______________________________________________________________

Stony Brook University spent $8,210,055 on men's teams and received $3,643,116 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave male athletes $9,751 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for men's teams. On average they make $135,748. They are supported by 24 assistant coaches who earn $47,924 on average.

Stony Brook University spent $4,799,904 on women's teams and received $1,350,420 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave female athletes $11,927 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for women's teams. They make, on average, $79,794. They are supported by 15 assistant coaches who earn, on average, $32,844.

_______________________________________________________________

If you are president of the university these are net-negative numbers. As a positive aside, the women are getting more funding than the men.

Good discussion. As I’m sure you read SBU will have football with a CAA schedule in the spring. Leads one to believe that CAA will have conference games. College sports ....Bottom line all lose money for their respective school. Their function is not to make money. There may/will be cutbacks. But I disagree with your initial premiss that the sky is falling and no SUNY sports for another year.

As I am sure many have heard a few Ivy league have announced NO winter sports I have a feeling that this will soon apply to spring sports as well what a complete mess this will be

Lets see what happens in the election

TRUTH

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Nice try. I know several college All Americans that are incredible players that applied and did not get an invite. The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA. There are always politics in sports but this is about the worse I have ever seen.

I agree that the selection is a bit off... that said, "The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA" ... I am pretty sure she was named to the Under Armour Senior Girls All-American Team.

Ohhhh. HS AA means something when they are playing in college. And there you have it. On many a threads the player bio seems to mean something. So that’s why we are where we are when it comes down to selecting UA teams and HS AA. When you distill it down, the same few (mainly 1 person) gets to stack those teams with marginal players from her team/org who then pack their player bio’s with nonsense. What garbage.

I don’t think it means anything when they are playing in college and I do not think bio’s mean anything either. But if you look at the history of the players who were named to the Under Armour Senior All American Team you will see that the large majority of those players go on to have very good college careers , primarily at the Top 10 - 15 programs. I don’t think anyone questions the players ability, just where she is in her development vs many of the top attackers in the game. The kid is legit but there are many who have proven themselves at the highest level.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

I’m very involved in the collegiate aspect of lacrosse. I’m also pessimistic about SUNY as I have seen how they operate with regards to collegiate sports. You can throw the budget and spreadsheets in the trash can. SUNY has a $900 million shortfall to fill and the governor has given each school a directive to cut their costs. Albany and Stony Brook have the two biggest shortfalls. They haven’t announced how they are going to cut their budgets but I have a “feeling” sports MAY be part of the process.

_______________________________________________________________

Stony Brook University spent $8,210,055 on men's teams and received $3,643,116 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave male athletes $9,751 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for men's teams. On average they make $135,748. They are supported by 24 assistant coaches who earn $47,924 on average.

Stony Brook University spent $4,799,904 on women's teams and received $1,350,420 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave female athletes $11,927 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for women's teams. They make, on average, $79,794. They are supported by 15 assistant coaches who earn, on average, $32,844.

_______________________________________________________________

If you are president of the university these are net-negative numbers. As a positive aside, the women are getting more funding than the men.

Good discussion. As I’m sure you read SBU will have football with a CAA schedule in the spring. Leads one to believe that CAA will have conference games. College sports ....Bottom line all lose money for their respective school. Their function is not to make money. There may/will be cutbacks. But I disagree with your initial premiss that the sky is falling and no SUNY sports for another year.

As I am sure many have heard a few Ivy league have announced NO winter sports I have a feeling that this will soon apply to spring sports as well what a complete mess this will be

Lets see what happens in the election

very true

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Nice try. I know several college All Americans that are incredible players that applied and did not get an invite. The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA. There are always politics in sports but this is about the worse I have ever seen.

I agree that the selection is a bit off... that said, "The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA" ... I am pretty sure she was named to the Under Armour Senior Girls All-American Team.

Ohhhh. HS AA means something when they are playing in college. And there you have it. On many a threads the player bio seems to mean something. So that’s why we are where we are when it comes down to selecting UA teams and HS AA. When you distill it down, the same few (mainly 1 person) gets to stack those teams[/b[b]] with marginal players from her team/org who then pack their player bio’s with nonsense. What garbage.

[/u]

Well the kid your think is undeserving played for Top Guns.. so I guess that spoils that theory[u]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Nice try. I know several college All Americans that are incredible players that applied and did not get an invite. The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA. There are always politics in sports but this is about the worse I have ever seen.

I agree that the selection is a bit off... that said, "The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA" ... I am pretty sure she was named to the Under Armour Senior Girls All-American Team.

Ohhhh. HS AA means something when they are playing in college. And there you have it. On many a threads the player bio seems to mean something. So that’s why we are where we are when it comes down to selecting UA teams and HS AA. When you distill it down, the same few (mainly 1 person) gets to stack those teams with marginal players from her team/org who then pack their player bio’s with nonsense. What garbage.

I don’t think it means anything when they are playing in college and I do not think bio’s mean anything either. But if you look at the history of the players who were named to the Under Armour Senior All American Team you will see that the large majority of those players go on to have very good college careers , primarily at the Top 10 - 15 programs. I don’t think anyone questions the players ability, just where she is in her development vs many of the top attackers in the game. The kid is legit but there are many who have proven themselves at the highest level.

Sorry but this post is ridiculous. There are many high school players that are legit and many that are better than this selection. That said a player who has never played a college game has no business going to this tryout and its obvious to all that Spallina has his hands all over this . Normally I would say who cares but this player took the spot from a more deserving player( there are many) who this may have been their final chance to make the most prestigious womens lacrosse team in the world. I know Spallina only cares about himself but I am shocked USlacrosse would allow this to happen. Not sure why Levy would allow this when she has multiple freshmen with way more accolades including the most hyped high school player in history who she obviously knew did not deserve a selection never having played a college game. Spallina and this nonsense is the reason so many players and parents leave the sport.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

did ya ever think that some girls said No? could they have offered other girls whose lives have moved on from lacrosse the opportunity but they passed on it.. ya know like maybe job commitments, covid concerns, or maybe they're afraid they put in all the time and energy and the event gets canceled anyway?
the list is the list, good on those that made it.

Actually got a response from US lacrosse while they wouldn't respond to particular players they said ALL players had to have registered for this particular event and there was a panel of 20+ coaches that selected and rated each position. Players were picked in rank order attack was by far the most heavily populated position followed by Defense and midfielders then goalies May not believe them but at least got a legitimate response

Where did you contact US lacrosse to get this response? There is no way this was not all about Spallina pushing his agenda. The player in question's biggest accolade is UA senior AA in a season that was not played. If you are trying to justify this selection there is no possible way any reasonable person can. Sorry but US lacrosse , Levy and Spallina should be ashamed they took a spot from a deserving player so Spallina can push his agenda.

Nobody on here has tried to justify the selection, pretty sure everyone knows who pushed it. But you can’t cry “it’s all political” when you look at the players on the list. BTW, UA Senior All American is the top honor for HS players and it is based off the summer circuit as that is where the most competitive HS lacrosse is played.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Nice try. I know several college All Americans that are incredible players that applied and did not get an invite. The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA. There are always politics in sports but this is about the worse I have ever seen.

I agree that the selection is a bit off... that said, "The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA" ... I am pretty sure she was named to the Under Armour Senior Girls All-American Team.

Ohhhh. HS AA means something when they are playing in college. And there you have it. On many a threads the player bio seems to mean something. So that’s why we are where we are when it comes down to selecting UA teams and HS AA. When you distill it down, the same few (mainly 1 person) gets to stack those teams with marginal players from her team/org who then pack their player bio’s with nonsense. What garbage.

I don’t think it means anything when they are playing in college and I do not think bio’s mean anything either. But if you look at the history of the players who were named to the Under Armour Senior All American Team you will see that the large majority of those players go on to have very good college careers , primarily at the Top 10 - 15 programs. I don’t think anyone questions the players ability, just where she is in her development vs many of the top attackers in the game. The kid is legit but there are many who have proven themselves at the highest level.

Sorry but this post is ridiculous. There are many high school players that are legit and many that are better than this selection. That said a player who has never played a college game has no business going to this tryout and its obvious to all that Spallina has his hands all over this . Normally I would say who cares but this player took the spot from a more deserving player( there are many) who this may have been their final chance to make the most prestigious womens lacrosse team in the world. I know Spallina only cares about himself but I am shocked USlacrosse would allow this to happen. Not sure why Levy would allow this when she has multiple freshmen with way more accolades including the most hyped high school player in history who she obviously knew did not deserve a selection never having played a college game. Spallina and this nonsense is the reason so many players and parents leave the sport.

Which post is ridiculous? It looks like the one (above yours) the one you are responding to is saying basically what you are saying. The reality is, the kid is an excellent player. However, when there are Division I All Americans not on the list it is right to question the selection. Just remember, it is not the players fault...

It’s bad enough JS politics gave this unearned, undeserving hand out at the expense of many other actually earning it! To listen to anyone defend it is just dense. The only thing this kid ever earned was being asked to play for Spallina. She did nothing in high school but ride the coattails her junior year from their star player being face guarded! That is her one lacrosse accolade. What has she done? Nothing. She was a no name who earned nothing at Under Armour except for the hand out of senior year when she did not play and they GAVE HER the Senior UA All-American! So stop the BS and just call it like it is. The biggest political BS move in US lacrosse history. That is more acceptable than to listen to you try and defend it. Disgrace. Just stop already! This is a joke.

A vey interesting article from the Atlantic regarding "Country Club Sports" ( including Lacrosse) in college:

A bit of a long read but very well done, towards the end of it the author provides an interesting theory on why Stanford dropped 11 varsity sports earlier this year ( and it isn't financial)

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazin...che-sports-ivy-league-admissions/616474/

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Nice try. I know several college All Americans that are incredible players that applied and did not get an invite. The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA. There are always politics in sports but this is about the worse I have ever seen.

I agree that the selection is a bit off... that said, "The Stony Brook player was not even a high school AA" ... I am pretty sure she was named to the Under Armour Senior Girls All-American Team.

Ohhhh. HS AA means something when they are playing in college. And there you have it. On many a threads the player bio seems to mean something. So that’s why we are where we are when it comes down to selecting UA teams and HS AA. When you distill it down, the same few (mainly 1 person) gets to stack those teams[/b[b]] with marginal players from her team/org who then pack their player bio’s with nonsense. What garbage.

[/u]

Well the kid your think is undeserving played for Top Guns.. so I guess that spoils that theory[u]

Huh. Wake up. You seem very defensive. The quote is about the whole selection process from UA Command, UA Highlight to HS AA etc. There is a common thread to who gets selected and the majority are picked from certain High schools whose coaches are part of YJ and players from YJ and this allows marginal players to pack their bio’s with nonsense

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It’s bad enough JS politics gave this unearned, undeserving hand out at the expense of many other actually earning it! To listen to anyone defend it is just dense. The only thing this kid ever earned was being asked to play for Spallina. She did nothing in high school but ride the coattails her junior year from their star player being face guarded! That is her one lacrosse accolade. What has she done? Nothing. She was a no name who earned nothing at Under Armour except for the hand out of senior year when she did not play and they GAVE HER the Senior UA All-American! So stop the BS and just call it like it is. The biggest political BS move in US lacrosse history. That is more acceptable than to listen to you try and defend it. Disgrace. Just stop already! This is a joke.

Wow, a lot of anger. I have not read a single post defending this selection. I guess you must be one of those delusional parents who just can’t stand it when other players are considered stronger than your daughter by people other than you. Why attack the player? Most rational people understand that the player didn’t do anything wrong. Complain all you want about the coaches or USLacrosse but show a little class and stop trying to tear down a 17 or 18 year old college freshman on an anonymous forum.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It’s bad enough JS politics gave this unearned, undeserving hand out at the expense of many other actually earning it! To listen to anyone defend it is just dense. The only thing this kid ever earned was being asked to play for Spallina. She did nothing in high school but ride the coattails her junior year from their star player being face guarded! That is her one lacrosse accolade. What has she done? Nothing. She was a no name who earned nothing at Under Armour except for the hand out of senior year when she did not play and they GAVE HER the Senior UA All-American! So stop the BS and just call it like it is. The biggest political BS move in US lacrosse history. That is more acceptable than to listen to you try and defend it. Disgrace. Just stop already! This is a joke.

He’s always been that way! I agree that there is absolutely no way a girl who has yet to play a college game should be trying out for this type of team!! How many HS AAs have gone to college to never be heard from again. D1 is a total different animal. Even the #1 HS recruit, CW, who in my opinion is overrated, was not put on this list. Prove yourself in college before getting this type of opportunity. Plenty of other girls have, but unfortunately won’t get a chance due to sleazy politics. Disgusting!

Excellent player? You don't get to just call a kid an excellent player because Spallina tells us to. You earn it. What has she earned? She hasn't played since junior year high school where she earned nothing accolades and earned nothing at under armour either (the Senior UA title that was a hand out based on an invisible season). Since her days of playing lacrosse earning nothing, what has she proven by not stepping on a field? Nothing + Nothing = Nothing. Watching people try and defend it is as big a problem as the BS reason she was asked to try out.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It’s bad enough JS politics gave this unearned, undeserving hand out at the expense of many other actually earning it! To listen to anyone defend it is just dense. The only thing this kid ever earned was being asked to play for Spallina. She did nothing in high school but ride the coattails her junior year from their star player being face guarded! That is her one lacrosse accolade. What has she done? Nothing. She was a no name who earned nothing at Under Armour except for the hand out of senior year when she did not play and they GAVE HER the Senior UA All-American! So stop the BS and just call it like it is. The biggest political BS move in US lacrosse history. That is more acceptable than to listen to you try and defend it. Disgrace. Just stop already! This is a joke.

He’s always been that way! I agree that there is absolutely no way a girl who has yet to play a college game should be trying out for this type of team!! How many HS AAs have gone to college to never be heard from again. D1 is a total different animal. Even the #1 HS recruit, CW, who in my opinion is overrated, was not put on this list. Prove yourself in college before getting this type of opportunity. Plenty of other girls have, but unfortunately won’t get a chance due to sleazy politics. Disgusting!

Just sign your name isn’t hard to tel who this is How is the weather on the east end

I'm sure she's a good kid but with no accolades. That's just a fact, not an attack. Correct us and enlighten us all with what she has done in her lacrosse career to earn this. Can't find anything.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I'm sure she's a good kid but with no accolades. That's just a fact, not an attack. Correct us and enlighten us all with what she has done in her lacrosse career to earn this. Can't find anything.

Its just a try-out, give the kid a chance..lets see how she does?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Excellent player? You don't get to just call a kid an excellent player because Spallina tells us to. You earn it. What has she earned? She hasn't played since junior year high school where she earned nothing accolades and earned nothing at under armour either (the Senior UA title that was a hand out based on an invisible season). Since her days of playing lacrosse earning nothing, what has she proven by not stepping on a field? Nothing + Nothing = Nothing. Watching people try and defend it is as big a problem as the BS reason she was asked to try out.

Give it a rest already, or put your name on it if you are going to continue to diminish the player and her accomplishments. Not a single post has tried to defend the selection. You on the other hand want to tear down a specific player.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It’s bad enough JS politics gave this unearned, undeserving hand out at the expense of many other actually earning it! To listen to anyone defend it is just dense. The only thing this kid ever earned was being asked to play for Spallina. She did nothing in high school but ride the coattails her junior year from their star player being face guarded! That is her one lacrosse accolade. What has she done? Nothing. She was a no name who earned nothing at Under Armour except for the hand out of senior year when she did not play and they GAVE HER the Senior UA All-American! So stop the BS and just call it like it is. The biggest political BS move in US lacrosse history. That is more acceptable than to listen to you try and defend it. Disgrace. Just stop already! This is a joke.

He’s always been that way! I agree that there is absolutely no way a girl who has yet to play a college game should be trying out for this type of team!! How many HS AAs have gone to college to never be heard from again. D1 is a total different animal. Even the #1 HS recruit, CW, who in my opinion is overrated, was not put on this list. Prove yourself in college before getting this type of opportunity. Plenty of other girls have, but unfortunately won’t get a chance due to sleazy politics. Disgusting!

Just sign your name isn’t hard to tel who this is How is the weather on the east end

i was thinking the same thing!

". BTW, UA Senior All American is the top honor for HS players and it is based off the summer circuit as that is where the most competitive HS lacrosse is played."

Completely inaccurate ,it is based primarily on high school play which is the reason they ask for high school stats .

"Wow, a lot of anger. I have not read a single post defending this selection. I guess you must be one of those delusional parents who just can’t stand it when other players are considered stronger than your daughter by people other than you. Why attack the player? Most rational people understand that the player didn’t do anything wrong. Complain all you want about the coaches or USLacrosse but show a little class and stop trying to tear down a 17 or 18 year old college freshman on an anonymous forum."

Of course people are angry and your nonsense about jealousy makes no sense when even you say no one is defending the selection. Although no one should attack the player ( she gets some of the blame as she applied and I guarantee knew the fix was in ) it is impossible to discuss how sleazy this selection was without pointing out she has little to no actual accolades. Again Spallina has stolen the spot from someone who has proven themselves in college and it is politics at its worst. Hopefully someone will post a contact at US lacrosse so its members can expres how disgusted they are , honestly Spalina should be removed from ever being involved again.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I'm sure she's a good kid but with no accolades. That's just a fact, not an attack. Correct us and enlighten us all with what she has done in her lacrosse career to earn this. Can't find anything.

What is wrong with you? Why attack the kid? She didn't select herself. If you want to call out JS and the rest of the people involved in the selection process feel free but enough with the nonsense. BTW, you say no accolades I am certain that she was named Under Armour Senior All American. That does not entitle anyone to make this tryout but pretty sure her and the other 43 players are all pretty darn good. This argument should not be focussed on the player, anyone with half a brain knows where the attention should be directed.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I'm sure she's a good kid but with no accolades. That's just a fact, not an attack. Correct us and enlighten us all with what she has done in her lacrosse career to earn this. Can't find anything.

You won't. There isn't anything! Wish her well in college, but she is not worthy of this at this time.

UA Senior All American selections have never been about High School Play. It is all based of the Club Summer circuit and in recent years since the "Underclass Games" and even The Committed Academy. They start announcing the players in the beginning of April so they already know how is making the team (well before HS season is complete). The main person who evaluates players is the same person who takes point on the IL Player rankings (there is always a very strong correlation between IL Senior rankings and Under Armour AA selections). All of the evaluations are done in the summer at the major tournaments and at the IL underclass games where players can be seen competing against the best players from around the country. Go back and check, If a player is ranked in the Top 40 by IL there is a very good chance they will be selected as an UA AA.

Funny , not old or mature enough to face some criticism but old enough to be unfairly selected to try out for a women’s team .

"Give the kid a chance" ...and there here you have it. Participation trophy time. No accolades, earned nothing, but give her a chance because? Oh right, because she is JS's new project.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Funny , not old or mature enough to face some criticism but old enough to be unfairly selected to try out for a women’s team .

Funny how you want to criticize a young women while remaining anonymous. Please tell everyone who your daughter is so the rest of the haters can go on the attack. This is not about the player, it’s about the people who made the decision.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

"Give the kid a chance" ...and there here you have it. Participation trophy time. No accolades, earned nothing, but give her a chance because? Oh right, because she is JS's new project.

Get over it already...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Funny , not old or mature enough to face some criticism but old enough to be unfairly selected to try out for a women’s team .

Once you enter college, and turn 18, you're not a kid anymore. There are going to be critics, that's part of life. When people think something important was done unfairly, they will state their claim and provide evidence. I don't see anyone on here attacking the girl, in fact every post I read wishes her well. The point is she had no business being chosen based on her accolades (non). That's all. Stop trying to make more of it than it is. My daughter was in no way in the running for this, but I 100% agree with other posters that there were so many other girls who had actual college accomplishments that qualified them for an invite.

I agree this is not the girls fault at all. She applied like many others and was selected. As previously said she is very very good player(do I think better than other kids in college no-but not her issue or fault) . I wish her luck. I wouldn’t be surprised to see her make the training squad for sure and team potentially The coaching staff has to save face and their EGO now.

Also a good preview to the state of women’s lax for future. Let’s you think about that one-not good.

This is on the three coaches and mainly Levy. She is the Head Coach with final say. Spillana has his players back(always has) and had an agenda. He was successful. He made Levy look foolish to the lacrosse world. Second agenda accomplished . I would also like US lacrosse to announce who was on the Selection panel. I think this should be public knowledge for a non profit to provide, and maybe make things clear. They noted a past player and coach of team USA-who was this?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I agree this is not the girls fault at all. She applied like many others and was selected. As previously said she is very very good player(do I think better than other kids in college no-but not her issue or fault) . I wish her luck. I wouldn’t be surprised to see her make the training squad for sure and team potentially The coaching staff has to save face and their EGO now.

Also a good preview to the state of women’s lax for future. Let’s you think about that one-not good.

This is on the three coaches and mainly Levy. She is the Head Coach with final say. Spillana has his players back(always has) and had an agenda. He was successful. He made Levy look foolish to the lacrosse world. Second agenda accomplished . I would also like US lacrosse to announce who was on the Selection panel. I think this should be public knowledge for a non profit to provide, and maybe make things clear. They noted a past player and coach of team USA-who was this?

Over 20 people on committee if it was just one person it wouldn’t happen as much as this pisses us off there were clearly many that also voted this way

Who are the 20 people? Is there a list?

Every time a pool of players is selected for something high profile like this, there are some deserving players left off the list. Some of you have no problem with your daughter getting hype and opportunities over others because she plays for a certain club or high school or committed to a prestigious college, but when the shoe is on the other foot you lose it. Maybe it's never happened to your daughter before, but others have been through it and the smart ones handle it gracefully and use it as motivation and a learning experience. It's done, move on. Try to be supportive because the players chosen did not select themselves and don't deserve to be bashed for it. I bet there were other incoming college freshman who also applied and maybe the one chosen must have had something the panel was looking for that other applicants didn't.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Every time a pool of players is selected for something high profile like this, there are some deserving players left off the list. Some of you have no problem with your daughter getting hype and opportunities over others because she plays for a certain club or high school or committed to a prestigious college, but when the shoe is on the other foot you lose it. Maybe it's never happened to your daughter before, but others have been through it and the smart ones handle it gracefully and use it as motivation and a learning experience. It's done, move on. Try to be supportive because the players chosen did not select themselves and don't deserve to be bashed for it. I bet there were other incoming college freshman who also applied and maybe the one chosen must have had something the panel was looking for that other applicants didn't.

Like what? The Daddy Warbucks of college lacrosse as a coach?

Also hearing many players chose not to apply for whatever reasons so the player pool was smaller than anticipated which makes sense

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Every time a pool of players is selected for something high profile like this, there are some deserving players left off the list. Some of you have no problem with your daughter getting hype and opportunities over others because she plays for a certain club or high school or committed to a prestigious college, but when the shoe is on the other foot you lose it. Maybe it's never happened to your daughter before, but others have been through it and the smart ones handle it gracefully and use it as motivation and a learning experience. It's done, move on. Try to be supportive because the players chosen did not select themselves and don't deserve to be bashed for it. I bet there were other incoming college freshman who also applied and maybe the one chosen must have had something the panel was looking for that other applicants didn't.

Like what? The Daddy Warbucks of college lacrosse as a coach?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I agree this is not the girls fault at all. She applied like many others and was selected. As previously said she is very very good player(do I think better than other kids in college no-but not her issue or fault) . I wish her luck. I wouldn’t be surprised to see her make the training squad for sure and team potentially The coaching staff has to save face and their EGO now.

Also a good preview to the state of women’s lax for future. Let’s you think about that one-not good.

This is on the three coaches and mainly Levy. She is the Head Coach with final say. Spillana has his players back(always has) and had an agenda. He was successful. He made Levy look foolish to the lacrosse world. Second agenda accomplished . I would also like US lacrosse to announce who was on the Selection panel. I think this should be public knowledge for a non profit to provide, and maybe make things clear. They noted a past player and coach of team USA-who was this?

. The player and her parents are of course partly to blame for this obviously unethical selection. "Very, Very good " according to who ,again her accolades are good at best but not great for a high school player. As far as him making Levy look foolish I agree but it makes him look dishonorable and sleazy and hopefully more players transfer out of his program .

“ spallina always has his players back” might be the funniest comment I heard in this site. He had 11 recruits in 2018 class only 2 are left. Ask the 9 that left if he always had their backs, and while you’re at it let’s ask about how he treats 2nd year players with scholarship money. He is a master at the social media game and building up individual players.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I agree this is not the girls fault at all. She applied like many others and was selected. As previously said she is very very good player(do I think better than other kids in college no-but not her issue or fault) . I wish her luck. I wouldn’t be surprised to see her make the training squad for sure and team potentially The coaching staff has to save face and their EGO now.

Also a good preview to the state of women’s lax for future. Let’s you think about that one-not good.

This is on the three coaches and mainly Levy. She is the Head Coach with final say. Spillana has his players back(always has) and had an agenda. He was successful. He made Levy look foolish to the lacrosse world. Second agenda accomplished . I would also like US lacrosse to announce who was on the Selection panel. I think this should be public knowledge for a non profit to provide, and maybe make things clear. They noted a past player and coach of team USA-who was this?

. The player and her parents are of course partly to blame for this obviously unethical selection. "Very, Very good " according to who ,again her accolades are good at best but not great for a high school player. As far as him making Levy look foolish I agree but it makes him look dishonorable and sleazy and hopefully more players transfer out of his program .

[ChillLaxin]. BTW, For the most part High School Accolades mean nothing so not sure why some want to keep carrying on about them or lack of them. With the exception of Under Armour Senior All American and the US Lacrosse 8 or 9 from Nassau, Suffolk and other Hot Bed Areas its all BS as there are simply too many to count. This has nothing to do with player or parents. It is about the people who selected the players. It is very hard to see the justification in this selection but to those who want to knock the player you are way off base.

"[ChillLaxin]. BTW, For the most part High School Accolades mean nothing so not sure why some want to keep carrying on about them or lack of them. With the exception of Under Armour Senior All American and the US Lacrosse 8 or 9 from Nassau, Suffolk and other Hot Bed Areas its all BS as there are simply too many to count. This has nothing to do with player or parents. It is about the people who selected the players. It is very hard to see the justification in this selection but to those who want to knock the player you are way off base."
As Joe Biden would say "come on man". People are talking about high school accolades because that is all this player has . How is it way off base to knock one of the main actors in this obviously unethical scheme ,you want to get selected for a women's team that you obviously have no business being selected for there is going to be some negative attention. In Nassau and Suffolk I believe US lax AA is more of an honor than UA senior AA as the selection is made by coaches who actually know the players , yes politics involved in both .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

"[ChillLaxin]. BTW, For the most part High School Accolades mean nothing so not sure why some want to keep carrying on about them or lack of them. With the exception of Under Armour Senior All American and the US Lacrosse 8 or 9 from Nassau, Suffolk and other Hot Bed Areas its all BS as there are simply too many to count. This has nothing to do with player or parents. It is about the people who selected the players. It is very hard to see the justification in this selection but to those who want to knock the player you are way off base."
As Joe Biden would say "come on man". People are talking about high school accolades because that is all this player has . How is it way off base to knock one of the main actors in this obviously unethical scheme ,you want to get selected for a women's team that you obviously have no business being selected for there is going to be some negative attention. In Nassau and Suffolk I believe US lax AA is more of an honor than UA senior AA as the selection is made by coaches who actually know the players , yes politics involved in both .

Did you quote Joe Biden oh wow

Originally Posted by Anonymous

As I am sure many have heard a few Ivy league have announced NO winter sports I have a feeling that this will soon apply to spring sports as well what a complete mess this will be

I agree. ;0(

Agree There will not be an Ivy season maybe not one for anyone[/quote]

Daughters fall ball practices shut down most likely for semester. Many schools not doing anything I am really starting to believe we will not have a Spring season of any type

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=baldbear]I’m very involved in the collegiate aspect of lacrosse. I’m also pessimistic about SUNY as I have seen how they operate with regards to collegiate sports. You can throw the budget and spreadsheets in the trash can. SUNY has a $900 million shortfall to fill and the governor has given each school a directive to cut their costs. Albany and Stony Brook have the two biggest shortfalls. They haven’t announced how they are going to cut their budgets but I have a “feeling” sports MAY be part of the process.

_______________________________________________________________

Stony Brook University spent $8,210,055 on men's teams and received $3,643,116 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave male athletes $9,751 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for men's teams. On average they make $135,748. They are supported by 24 assistant coaches who earn $47,924 on average.

Stony Brook University spent $4,799,904 on women's teams and received $1,350,420 in revenue. On average, Stony Brook University gave female athletes $11,927 in sports related student aid.

There are 8 head coaches for women's teams. They make, on average, $79,794. They are supported by 15 assistant coaches who earn, on average, $32,844.

_______________________________________________________________

If you are president of the university these are net-negative numbers. As a positive aside, the women are getting more funding than the men.

Good discussion. As I’m sure you read SBU will have football with a CAA schedule in the spring. Leads one to believe that CAA will have conference games. College sports ....Bottom line all lose money for their respective school. Their function is not to make money. There may/will be cutbacks. But I disagree with your initial premiss that the sky is falling and no SUNY sports for another year.

As I am sure many have heard a few Ivy league have announced NO winter sports I have a feeling that this will soon apply to spring sports as well what a complete mess this will be
Not getting better

With different states having different rules how can there be college sports

Originally Posted by Anonymous

With different states having different rules how can there be college sports

Uhhh, I don't know....maybe look at college football?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

"[ChillLaxin]. BTW, For the most part High School Accolades mean nothing so not sure why some want to keep carrying on about them or lack of them. With the exception of Under Armour Senior All American and the US Lacrosse 8 or 9 from Nassau, Suffolk and other Hot Bed Areas its all BS as there are simply too many to count. This has nothing to do with player or parents. It is about the people who selected the players. It is very hard to see the justification in this selection but to those who want to knock the player you are way off base."
As Joe Biden would say "come on man". People are talking about high school accolades because that is all this player has . How is it way off base to knock one of the main actors in this obviously unethical scheme ,you want to get selected for a women's team that you obviously have no business being selected for there is going to be some negative attention. In Nassau and Suffolk I believe US lax AA is more of an honor than UA senior AA as the selection is made by coaches who actually know the players , yes politics involved in both .

Did you quote Joe Biden oh wow

Yeah, Wow... followed up with "main actors"... Keep telling yourself that the player and her family are complicit in this.

I believe they have changed the selection process on LI for US Lacrosse AA recently (maybe it is less political now) but in the past it was the most political process of any selection that I am aware of. There was a "small committee" of coaches who made the selection and it was extremely political. As for "the coaches actually know the players" that was the main problem. This board is littered with posts calling out "Coaches" for selecting "their players" as is exactly the case in the situation that we are discussing with the Stony Brook coach and his player.

The Under Armour selections are primarily made by the women who does the player rankings for Inside Lacrosse. Those rankings are for the most part based on Club games and UA Underclass Games (yes, you are at a disadvantage if you do not make the UA Underclass Team). There is politicking but for the most part The women from IL watches the players at several "high end" events and then ranks the players. There is general consensus on the players selected by all involved with the process. As has been posted on this site many times The UA AA track record is excellent as is the Long Island US Lacrosse AA selection (it just stinks for players who never had a coach on the committee). The problem (at least it used to be) was that the coaches advocated for and selected their own players (club or HS coach).

At the end of the day this is about the people who made this selection, not on the player and or the parents.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

With different states having different rules how can there be college sports

We know the deal. Most lefty schools mentioned NESCAC and Ivy will not try to find a work around. Unfortunately these college admins are fine with closing sports for their students. Hopefully other conferences will find ways to help their teams participate in a sport they recruited their players for. It’s obvious that football has found a way. May not be perfect but student athletes are playing. Unfortunately politics is having an influence on these student athletes who have to abide by political college administrators.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

With different states having different rules how can there be college sports

We know the deal. Most lefty schools mentioned NESCAC and Ivy will not try to find a work around. Unfortunately these college admins are fine with closing sports for their students. Hopefully other conferences will find ways to help their teams participate in a sport they recruited their players for. It’s obvious that football has found a way. May not be perfect but student athletes are playing. Unfortunately politics is having an influence on these student athletes who have to abide by political college administrators.

Truth

So what I read on Athletes Unlimited bringing on Women’s lacrosse it seems like a profit sharing model. You get paid if you can drive Digital audience, merchandise and attendance. How is this different from WPLL that financial couldn’t make it. Lacrosse in general is just a smaller sport in attendance. The WNBA needs the money from NBA to survivor. Unfortunately lax doesn’t have that in there favor. Are the players on there own dime until “potentially” get paid?

Players won’t like paying expenses with hope of pay check.

I must be missing something here, or I fear this won’t make it either. Must lax games I have been at are a few general
Fans and family.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So what I read on Athletes Unlimited bringing on Women’s lacrosse it seems like a profit sharing model. You get paid if you can drive Digital audience, merchandise and attendance. How is this different from WPLL that financial couldn’t make it. Lacrosse in general is just a smaller sport in attendance. The WNBA needs the money from NBA to survivor. Unfortunately lax doesn’t have that in there favor. Are the players on there own dime until “potentially” get paid?

Players won’t like paying expenses with hope of pay check.

I must be missing something here, or I fear this won’t make it either. Must lax games I have been at are a few general
Fans and family.

Another brutal attempt to launch women’s pro The talent is there it’s getting proper leadership

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It’s bad enough JS politics gave this unearned, undeserving hand out at the expense of many other actually earning it! To listen to anyone defend it is just dense. The only thing this kid ever earned was being asked to play for Spallina. She did nothing in high school but ride the coattails her junior year from their star player being face guarded! That is her one lacrosse accolade. What has she done? Nothing. She was a no name who earned nothing at Under Armour except for the hand out of senior year when she did not play and they GAVE HER the Senior UA All-American! So stop the BS and just call it like it is. The biggest political BS move in US lacrosse history. That is more acceptable than to listen to you try and defend it. Disgrace. Just stop already! This is a joke.

Very bitter and green.

Everyone seems to agree that the selection is questionable but you seem way too bothered by it. Why attack the player? It appears to be personal with you. You state "What has she done? Nothing." What is wrong with you? To be fair, I don't think any player who has yet to play a single college game should be on this list. However, trying to belittle this player and her accomplishments is reprehensible. In fact, her accolades look pretty good: Ranked #25 in the Class of 2020 by Inside Lacrosse and Named to the 2020 Uunder Armour Senior All-America Team (Both are impressive). Playing for a perennial Top 10 -15 Team and is clearly one of their if not the Top Recruit / Freshmen. That speaks volumes as to the caliber of player that she is.

Questionable selection for this tryout but no question she is a very good player at this point in her career.

I wish her the best

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It’s bad enough JS politics gave this unearned, undeserving hand out at the expense of many other actually earning it! To listen to anyone defend it is just dense. The only thing this kid ever earned was being asked to play for Spallina. She did nothing in high school but ride the coattails her junior year from their star player being face guarded! That is her one lacrosse accolade. What has she done? Nothing. She was a no name who earned nothing at Under Armour except for the hand out of senior year when she did not play and they GAVE HER the Senior UA All-American! So stop the BS and just call it like it is. The biggest political BS move in US lacrosse history. That is more acceptable than to listen to you try and defend it. Disgrace. Just stop already! This is a joke.

Very bitter and green.

Everyone seems to agree that the selection is questionable but you seem way too bothered by it. Why attack the player? It appears to be personal with you. You state "What has she done? Nothing." What is wrong with you? To be fair, I don't think any player who has yet to play a single college game should be on this list. However, trying to belittle this player and her accomplishments is reprehensible. In fact, her accolades look pretty good: Ranked #25 in the Class of 2020 by Inside Lacrosse and Named to the 2020 Uunder Armour Senior All-America Team (Both are impressive). Playing for a perennial Top 10 -15 Team and is clearly one of their if not the Top Recruit / Freshmen. That speaks volumes as to the caliber of player that she is.

Questionable selection for this tryout but no question she is a very good player at this point in her career.

I wish her the best

Those are great accolades for a freshman in college, not so much for a team USA invitee! USL epic failure, once again. They need to do better!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It’s bad enough JS politics gave this unearned, undeserving hand out at the expense of many other actually earning it! To listen to anyone defend it is just dense. The only thing this kid ever earned was being asked to play for Spallina. She did nothing in high school but ride the coattails her junior year from their star player being face guarded! That is her one lacrosse accolade. What has she done? Nothing. She was a no name who earned nothing at Under Armour except for the hand out of senior year when she did not play and they GAVE HER the Senior UA All-American! So stop the BS and just call it like it is. The biggest political BS move in US lacrosse history. That is more acceptable than to listen to you try and defend it. Disgrace. Just stop already! This is a joke.

Very bitter and green.

Everyone seems to agree that the selection is questionable but you seem way too bothered by it. Why attack the player? It appears to be personal with you. You state "What has she done? Nothing." What is wrong with you? To be fair, I don't think any player who has yet to play a single college game should be on this list. However, trying to belittle this player and her accomplishments is reprehensible. In fact, her accolades look pretty good: Ranked #25 in the Class of 2020 by Inside Lacrosse and Named to the 2020 Uunder Armour Senior All-America Team (Both are impressive). Playing for a perennial Top 10 -15 Team and is clearly one of their if not the Top Recruit / Freshmen. That speaks volumes as to the caliber of player that she is.

Questionable selection for this tryout but no question she is a very good player at this point in her career.

I wish her the best

Those are great accolades for a freshman in college, not so much for a team USA invitee! USL epic failure, once again. They need to do better!

Agree with that. Impressive accolades and obviously a very good player. Just a little crazy to be selected over players who have proven themselves at the highest level. US Lacrosse, the selection committee and the coaches do not look good.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So what I read on Athletes Unlimited bringing on Women’s lacrosse it seems like a profit sharing model. You get paid if you can drive Digital audience, merchandise and attendance. How is this different from WPLL that financial couldn’t make it. Lacrosse in general is just a smaller sport in attendance. The WNBA needs the money from NBA to survivor. Unfortunately lax doesn’t have that in there favor. Are the players on there own dime until “potentially” get paid?

Players won’t like paying expenses with hope of pay check.

I must be missing something here, or I fear this won’t make it either. Must lax games I have been at are a few general
Fans and family.

Another brutal attempt to launch women’s pro The talent is there it’s getting proper leadership

Hoping this gets figured out at some point

Originally Posted by Anonymous

With different states having different rules how can there be college sports

We know the deal. Most lefty schools mentioned NESCAC and Ivy will not try to find a work around. Unfortunately these college admins are fine with closing sports for their students. Hopefully other conferences will find ways to help their teams participate in a sport they recruited their players for. It’s obvious that football has found a way. May not be perfect but student athletes are playing. Unfortunately politics is having an influence on these student athletes who have to abide by political college administrators.

Agree with this

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It’s bad enough JS politics gave this unearned, undeserving hand out at the expense of many other actually earning it! To listen to anyone defend it is just dense. The only thing this kid ever earned was being asked to play for Spallina. She did nothing in high school but ride the coattails her junior year from their star player being face guarded! That is her one lacrosse accolade. What has she done? Nothing. She was a no name who earned nothing at Under Armour except for the hand out of senior year when she did not play and they GAVE HER the Senior UA All-American! So stop the BS and just call it like it is. The biggest political BS move in US lacrosse history. That is more acceptable than to listen to you try and defend it. Disgrace. Just stop already! This is a joke.

Very bitter and green.

Everyone seems to agree that the selection is questionable but you seem way too bothered by it. Why attack the player? It appears to be personal with you. You state "What has she done? Nothing." What is wrong with you? To be fair, I don't think any player who has yet to play a single college game should be on this list. However, trying to belittle this player and her accomplishments is reprehensible. In fact, her accolades look pretty good: Ranked #25 in the Class of 2020 by Inside Lacrosse and Named to the 2020 Uunder Armour Senior All-America Team (Both are impressive). Playing for a perennial Top 10 -15 Team and is clearly one of their if not the Top Recruit / Freshmen. That speaks volumes as to the caliber of player that she is.

Questionable selection for this tryout but no question she is a very good player at this point in her career.

I wish her the best

Those are great accolades for a freshman in college, not so much for a team USA invitee! USL epic failure, once again. They need to do better!

That had to be a typo! The Stony Brook girl on the USA roster was ranked the 25th player in the Class of 2020? She never played a college game and her career achievement is being added to the Senior UA roster? Is this a joke or for real?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

As I am sure many have heard a few Ivy league have announced NO winter sports I have a feeling that this will soon apply to spring sports as well what a complete mess this will be

I agree. ;0(

Agree There will not be an Ivy season maybe not one for anyone

Daughters fall ball practices shut down most likely for semester. Many schools not doing anything I am really starting to believe we will not have a Spring season of any type[/quote]

At least they had some my daughters team has not had any actual full team practices

I am hearing The 2020 class to get another year for Spring sports, but only might be that class.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I am hearing The 2020 class to get another year for Spring sports, but only might be that class.

My daughter plays a fall sport in college and they will be playing in the spring but still get their year back

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I am hearing The 2020 class to get another year for Spring sports, but only might be that class.

My daughter plays a fall sport in college and they will be playing in the spring but still get their year back

Winter sports are also getting an extra year of eligibility due to covid uncertainty, even if they play some form of a season. Spring sports got an extra year this past spring for a partial season, so seems possible they won't get a second year for covid. Makes sense that players not rostered in 2020 (i.e. 2020 hs grads) get the extra year, though, since they have been/will be impacted similarly to 2020-21 fall and winter sports. Otherwise I can see a lot of freshman choosing to redshirt this year, maybe even those who would get meaningful playing time. My daughter's team is already planning for a condensed game schedule. Why give up a year of eligibility for a shortened season that might be canceled part way through, or player gets covid and misses 2-3 weeks by the time she is cleared to return, and some teams have larger than normal rosters due to 5th year seniors making it harder to earn playing time.

Just a few interesting things on USA
-Splillana running the team obviously
-Fall classic Womens US vs Canada game 5-4 at half, final 16-6. Canada ran entire game. They will sure stall in 2021. No shot clock.
-Ortega who to me was big miss most likely didn’t apply as she was invited by Levy in June 2019, was not ask to come back to additional training teams.
-Hoeg who I feel is one of the best attacker in country at any level was never ask to a training team at all. Going to tryout.
-M Taylor very solid goalie left out.
-Jenner and Choma to me big misses for at least a tryout. US was dominated on draw.

Clear to me who had players back in this selection. detest him or like him he goes to bat for his players and who doesn’t.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I am hearing The 2020 class to get another year for Spring sports, but only might be that class.

My daughter plays a fall sport in college and they will be playing in the spring but still get their year back

Winter sports are also getting an extra year of eligibility due to covid uncertainty, even if they play some form of a season. Spring sports got an extra year this past spring for a partial season, so seems possible they won't get a second year for covid. Makes sense that players not rostered in 2020 (i.e. 2020 hs grads) get the extra year, though, since they have been/will be impacted similarly to 2020-21 fall and winter sports. Otherwise I can see a lot of freshman choosing to redshirt this year, maybe even those who would get meaningful playing time. My daughter's team is already planning for a condensed game schedule. Why give up a year of eligibility for a shortened season that might be canceled part way through, or player gets covid and misses 2-3 weeks by the time she is cleared to return, and some teams have larger than normal rosters due to 5th year seniors making it harder to earn playing time.

Because there is more to life than lacrosse .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I am hearing The 2020 class to get another year for Spring sports, but only might be that class.

My daughter plays a fall sport in college and they will be playing in the spring but still get their year back

Winter sports are also getting an extra year of eligibility due to covid uncertainty, even if they play some form of a season. Spring sports got an extra year this past spring for a partial season, so seems possible they won't get a second year for covid. Makes sense that players not rostered in 2020 (i.e. 2020 hs grads) get the extra year, though, since they have been/will be impacted similarly to 2020-21 fall and winter sports. Otherwise I can see a lot of freshman choosing to redshirt this year, maybe even those who would get meaningful playing time. My daughter's team is already planning for a condensed game schedule. Why give up a year of eligibility for a shortened season that might be canceled part way through, or player gets covid and misses 2-3 weeks by the time she is cleared to return, and some teams have larger than normal rosters due to 5th year seniors making it harder to earn playing time.

Think having a spring season seems unlikely in college with every state having different rules

Sorry questionable selection is ridiculous . Unethical , political , embarrassing but questionable gives it a chance at being legit . Simply put there is no way to justify this selection and puts a stain on the reputations of all involved. Let’s also realize her Inside Lax ranking along with her UA senior AA may also have been just as political , not sure those accolades add up with never being named US lax AA especially when her high school coach has obviously a lot of pull .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I am hearing The 2020 class to get another year for Spring sports, but only might be that class.

My daughter plays a fall sport in college and they will be playing in the spring but still get their year back

Winter sports are also getting an extra year of eligibility due to covid uncertainty, even if they play some form of a season. Spring sports got an extra year this past spring for a partial season, so seems possible they won't get a second year for covid. Makes sense that players not rostered in 2020 (i.e. 2020 hs grads) get the extra year, though, since they have been/will be impacted similarly to 2020-21 fall and winter sports. Otherwise I can see a lot of freshman choosing to redshirt this year, maybe even those who would get meaningful playing time. My daughter's team is already planning for a condensed game schedule. Why give up a year of eligibility for a shortened season that might be canceled part way through, or player gets covid and misses 2-3 weeks by the time she is cleared to return, and some teams have larger than normal rosters due to 5th year seniors making it harder to earn playing time.

Because there is more to life than lacrosse .

True, but there are a number of seniors who returned this year for a 5th year as grad students. There are current seniors already planning to use their extra year of eligibility in 2022. There are plenty of players who take a 5th or even 6th year due to injury. There are college freshman who plan to attend graduate school, add a minor or specialization, etc. who would love to continue playing while they do it. There will be some who want to be done with college after four years and move on, but I think many players who love the sport would consider redshirting this year in hopes of four years of lacrosse that are more normal.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Sorry questionable selection is ridiculous . Unethical , political , embarrassing but questionable gives it a chance at being legit . Simply put there is no way to justify this selection and puts a stain on the reputations of all involved. Let’s also realize her Inside Lax ranking along with her UA senior AA may also have been just as political , not sure those accolades add up with never being named US lax AA especially when her high school coach has obviously a lot of pull .

Another hater trying to diminish a players accomplishments. I have not seen a single post of anyone trying to justify the selection but have noticed some post attacking the player and attempting to tear the player down and belittle her accolades.
Typical jealous parent who hates it when someone other than their daughter is recognized.

This selection was certainly questionable but there is absolutely no reason to make cowardly attacks. I guess there will always be haters who hide behind their keyboard attacking young women and trying to elevate their daughter by tearing down others.

Football found a way because of large network and conference network money.

Originally Posted by baldbear

Football found a way because of large network and conference network money.

Nope. Sorry. They found a way because they wanted to and came up with work arounds and put protocols in place that seem to be working.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Sorry questionable selection is ridiculous . Unethical , political , embarrassing but questionable gives it a chance at being legit . Simply put there is no way to justify this selection and puts a stain on the reputations of all involved. Let’s also realize her Inside Lax ranking along with her UA senior AA may also have been just as political , not sure those accolades add up with never being named US lax AA especially when her high school coach has obviously a lot of pull .

Another hater trying to diminish a players accomplishments. I have not seen a single post of anyone trying to justify the selection but have noticed some post attacking the player and attempting to tear the player down and belittle her accolades.
Typical jealous parent who hates it when someone other than their daughter is recognized.

This selection was certainly questionable but there is absolutely no reason to make cowardly attacks. I guess there will always be haters who hide behind their keyboard attacking young women and trying to elevate their daughter by tearing down others.

"Typical jealous parent and cowardly attacks" Yes mom and dad, you are right. 21 year old super star college NCAA First Team All-Americans who have proven themselves are jealous of little Sally who has done nothing in high school and not played a college game yet. They are upset because they earned it and were passed on due to your daughters coaches politics. Stop lecturing us and just say thank you to your coach and move on. Politics happen.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Sorry questionable selection is ridiculous . Unethical , political , embarrassing but questionable gives it a chance at being legit . Simply put there is no way to justify this selection and puts a stain on the reputations of all involved. Let’s also realize her Inside Lax ranking along with her UA senior AA may also have been just as political , not sure those accolades add up with never being named US lax AA especially when her high school coach has obviously a lot of pull .

Another hater trying to diminish a players accomplishments. I have not seen a single post of anyone trying to justify the selection but have noticed some post attacking the player and attempting to tear the player down and belittle her accolades.
Typical jealous parent who hates it when someone other than their daughter is recognized.

This selection was certainly questionable but there is absolutely no reason to make cowardly attacks. I guess there will always be haters who hide behind their keyboard attacking young women and trying to elevate their daughter by tearing down others.

Again you are too ignorant to understand questionable gives it some legitimacy which it had none . No jealousy just disgust that a player who has not earned this honor is taking the place of someone who has . Sorry the player applied for a women’s team knowing full well she did not deserve it and the fix was in . She has earned all the attention she is getting on these boards . The coach should be removed for abusing his position .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Sorry questionable selection is ridiculous . Unethical , political , embarrassing but questionable gives it a chance at being legit . Simply put there is no way to justify this selection and puts a stain on the reputations of all involved. Let’s also realize her Inside Lax ranking along with her UA senior AA may also have been just as political , not sure those accolades add up with never being named US lax AA especially when her high school coach has obviously a lot of pull .

Another hater trying to diminish a players accomplishments. I have not seen a single post of anyone trying to justify the selection but have noticed some post attacking the player and attempting to tear the player down and belittle her accolades.
Typical jealous parent who hates it when someone other than their daughter is recognized.

This selection was certainly questionable but there is absolutely no reason to make cowardly attacks. I guess there will always be haters who hide behind their keyboard attacking young women and trying to elevate their daughter by tearing down others.

"Typical jealous parent and cowardly attacks" Yes mom and dad, you are right. 21 year old super star college NCAA First Team All-Americans who have proven themselves are jealous of little Sally who has done nothing in high school and not played a college game yet. They are upset because they earned it and were passed on due to your daughters coaches politics. Stop lecturing us and just say thank you to your coach and move on. Politics happen.

Are you that dense? Nobody said that a 21 year old NCAA 1st Team All-American was jealous... Oh, and BTW... it is highly unlikely that the parents of the player in question are on here responding to your nonsense.

I think the point of the post that you are responding to was that "nobody" (except the people who made the decision) agrees with the selection. Some of us just don't see the point of trying to knock the player (because she did not select herself). You have made it personal and continue to attack the player as having "done nothing" in her HS career (which is obviously false). You are obviously bitter and that's okay. Personally, I just don't like reading anonymous, unsubstantiated attacks on players.

“Are you that dense? Nobody said that a 21 year old NCAA 1st Team All-American was jealous... Oh, and BTW... it is highly unlikely that the parents of the player in question are on here responding to your nonsense.

I think the point of the post that you are responding to was that "nobody" (except the people who made the decision) agrees with the selection. Some of us just don't see the point of trying to knock the player (because she did not select herself). You have made it personal and continue to attack the player as having "done nothing" in her HS career (which is obviously false). You are obviously bitter and that's okay. Personally, I just don't like reading anonymous, unsubstantiated attacks on players.”

Your bitter /jealousy response is ignorant. If they had selected an actual deserving player people would not be saying anything about the selections . Again you try to justify the selection by using questionable and saying the “people who made the decision “ actually agree with it when in fact the person ( Spallina) knows it’s unethical but just does not care because he has enough sycophants like you telling him how wonderful he is .
As far as the parents being on here I can guarantee that’s more likely than a player who has not played an actual lacrosse game in 22 months ,has never played a college game ,never been a US lax AA, never the best player on her team and did not make the U19 team getting an invite to tryout for the women’s national team .

As far as what you personally like no one cares and saying unsubstantiated just shows your lack of a grasp of the English language .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Are you that dense? Nobody said that a 21 year old NCAA 1st Team All-American was jealous... Oh, and BTW... it is highly unlikely that the parents of the player in question are on here responding to your nonsense.

I think the point of the post that you are responding to was that "nobody" (except the people who made the decision) agrees with the selection. Some of us just don't see the point of trying to knock the player (because she did not select herself). You have made it personal and continue to attack the player as having "done nothing" in her HS career (which is obviously false). You are obviously bitter and that's okay. Personally, I just don't like reading anonymous, unsubstantiated attacks on players.”

Your bitter /jealousy response is ignorant. If they had selected an actual deserving player people would not be saying anything about the selections . Again you try to justify the selection by using questionable and saying the “people who made the decision “ actually agree with it when in fact the person ( Spallina) knows it’s unethical but just does not care because he has enough sycophants like you telling him how wonderful he is .
As far as the parents being on here I can guarantee that’s more likely than a player who has not played an actual lacrosse game in 22 months ,has never played a college game ,never been a US lax AA, never the best player on her team and did not make the U19 team getting an invite to tryout for the women’s national team .

As far as what you personally like no one cares and saying unsubstantiated just shows your lack of a grasp of the English language .

She is a good player, she wouldn’t be playing at SBU if she wasn’t. However, to get an invitation for a try-out for this team is questionable at best. She has not done anything to prove she earned this, while many others have. I guess the saying, “it’s not what you know it’s who you know” stands true in this situation.

The focus needs to be on Spallina, Levy and Frank. They are the coaches and the select the kids with final say. Selection committee is I am sure a bunch of no names. At the end the coaches have no ethics or didn’t do the job of review.

Some better be careful of where they currently are at right now. The Gtown program fell off the rails when RF decided to coach USA, and asst lost her job at BU. Takes a ton of time away from regular duty at their school. History will tell you not good combination

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Football found a way because of large network and conference network money.

Nope. Sorry. They found a way because they wanted to and came up with work arounds and put protocols in place that seem to be working.

Only football came up with the "work arounds and put protocols in place"? That makes no sense. Then every sport would be playing using those protocols. Even after cancelling their fall seasons the PAC12 and Big Ten came back to football seeing the money left on the table. This is an excerpt from the New York Times article about why football is being played:

"The decisions by the leagues — some publicly unflinching, others openly deliberating from one month to the next — carry enormous implications for college athletics. By playing football, even without every stadium packed with fans, schools across the country will collectively earn hundreds of millions of dollars from broadcast rights and sponsorships that will prop up budgets that had been threatened with severe cuts."

Power conference football is a huge money generating college sport. They are not playing a lot football at lower conferences because there is no network money. Don't be surprised if winter sports are cancelled by power conferences too--except mens basketball.

Originally Posted by baldbear

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Football found a way because of large network and conference network money.

Nope. Sorry. They found a way because they wanted to and came up with work arounds and put protocols in place that seem to be working.

Only football came up with the "work arounds and put protocols in place"? So if the soccer programs came to to the athletic director and president of a school with the same "work arounds and protocols" they would be playing? That makes no sense. Then everyone would be playing. Even after cancelling their fall seasons the PAC12 and Big Ten came back to football seeing the money left on the table. This is an excerpt from the New York Times article about why football is being played:

"The decisions by the leagues — some publicly unflinching, others openly deliberating from one month to the next — carry enormous implications for college athletics. By playing football, even without every stadium packed with fans, schools across the country will collectively earn hundreds of millions of dollars from broadcast rights and sponsorships that will prop up budgets that had been threatened with severe cuts."

Power conference football is a huge money generating college sport. They are not playing football at lower conferences because there is no network money. Don't be surprised if winter sports are cancelled by power conferences too--except mens basketball.

Oh really. ..,. Wrong.....See you should have googled before you answered. ....NCAA study in 2019 found only 20 of 1,000 college football teams were profitable. Many lower conference football is being played. Now..... do your homework and find out how many college basketball programs are profitable. The # will surprise you.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Football found a way because of large network and conference network money.

Nope. Sorry. They found a way because they wanted to and came up with work arounds and put protocols in place that seem to be working.

Only football came up with the "work arounds and put protocols in place"? So if the soccer programs came to to the athletic director and president of a school with the same "work arounds and protocols" they would be playing? That makes no sense. Then everyone would be playing. Even after cancelling their fall seasons the PAC12 and Big Ten came back to football seeing the money left on the table. This is an excerpt from the New York Times article about why football is being played:

"The decisions by the leagues — some publicly unflinching, others openly deliberating from one month to the next — carry enormous implications for college athletics. By playing football, even without every stadium packed with fans, schools across the country will collectively earn hundreds of millions of dollars from broadcast rights and sponsorships that will prop up budgets that had been threatened with severe cuts."

Power conference football is a huge money generating college sport. They are not playing football at lower conferences because there is no network money. Don't be surprised if winter sports are cancelled by power conferences too--except mens basketball.

Oh really. ..,. Wrong.....See you should have googled before you answered. ....NCAA study in 2019 found only 20 of 1,000 college football teams were profitable. Many lower conference football is being played. Now..... do your homework and find out how many college basketball programs are profitable. The # will surprise you.

There are 674 collegiate football programs; 257 Division I, 167 Division II and 250 Division III. The "study" you note highlighted the top 20 most profitable programs as the result of legislation in some states to pay players (California leading the way). The 20th team made $28 million; I don't think #21 was in the red. Football is the number one generator of revenue which is passed along to other sports programs (for the Big East its basketball). The vast majority of D1 programs are profitable but here is the 20 noted in the 2019 NCAA report (which was not a "study"; each school must report to the NCAA the revenue and expenses for every sport every year):

Texas – $92 million
Tennessee – $70 million
LSU – $58 million
Michigan – $56 million
Notre Dame – $54 million
Georgia – $50 million
Ohio State – $50 million
Oklahoma – $48 million
Auburn – $47 million
Alabama – $46 million
Oregon – $40 million
Florida State – $39 million
Arkansas – $38 million
Washington – $38 million
Florida – $37 million
Texas A&M – $37 million
Penn State – $36 million
Michigan State – $32 million
USC – $29 million
South Carolina – $28 million

Basketball has more games but lower margins so again, most D1 programs are profitable. Louisville is the perennial #1 in this regard with profits over $40 million.

EDIT-You may be referencing the NCAA Annual report which represents 1,100 schools and ALL sports.

Originally Posted by baldbear

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Football found a way because of large network and conference network money.

Nope. Sorry. They found a way because they wanted to and came up with work arounds and put protocols in place that seem to be working.

Only football came up with the "work arounds and put protocols in place"? So if the soccer programs came to to the athletic director and president of a school with the same "work arounds and protocols" they would be playing? That makes no sense. Then everyone would be playing. Even after cancelling their fall seasons the PAC12 and Big Ten came back to football seeing the money left on the table. This is an excerpt from the New York Times article about why football is being played:

"The decisions by the leagues — some publicly unflinching, others openly deliberating from one month to the next — carry enormous implications for college athletics. By playing football, even without every stadium packed with fans, schools across the country will collectively earn hundreds of millions of dollars from broadcast rights and sponsorships that will prop up budgets that had been threatened with severe cuts."

Power conference football is a huge money generating college sport. They are not playing football at lower conferences because there is no network money. Don't be surprised if winter sports are cancelled by power conferences too--except mens basketball.

Oh really. ..,. Wrong.....See you should have googled before you answered. ....NCAA study in 2019 found only 20 of 1,000 college football teams were profitable. Many lower conference football is being played. Now..... do your homework and find out how many college basketball programs are profitable. The # will surprise you.

There are 674 collegiate football programs; 257 Division I, 167 Division II and 250 Division III. The "study" you note highlighted the top 20 most profitable programs as the result of legislation in some states to pay players (California leading the way). The 20th team made $28 million; I don't think #21 was in the red. Football is the number one generator of revenue which is passed along to other sports programs (for the Big East its basketball). The vast majority of D1 programs are profitable but here is the 20 noted in the 2019 NCAA report (which was not a "study"; each school must report to the NCAA the revenue and expenses for every sport every year):

Texas – $92 million
Tennessee – $70 million
LSU – $58 million
Michigan – $56 million
Notre Dame – $54 million
Georgia – $50 million
Ohio State – $50 million
Oklahoma – $48 million
Auburn – $47 million
Alabama – $46 million
Oregon – $40 million
Florida State – $39 million
Arkansas – $38 million
Washington – $38 million
Florida – $37 million
Texas A&M – $37 million
Penn State – $36 million
Michigan State – $32 million
USC – $29 million
South Carolina – $28 million

Basketball has more games but lower margins so again, most D1 programs are profitable. Louisville is the perennial #1 in this regard with profits over $40 million.

EDIT-You may be referencing the NCAA Annual report which represents 1,100 schools and ALL sports.

Cmon.... you went with the Athnet stats that didn’t mention EXPENSES. Sooo... I will give a few...

Texas-revenue-$224M. Expenses-$205M
Texas A&M-rev $212M. Expenses-$170M
Ohio State-rev-$210M. Expenses-$221M
Michigan-rev-$198M. Expenses-$191M
Georgia-rev-$174M. Expenses-$143M
Penn State-rev-$164M. Expenses-$160M
Alabama-rev-$164M. Expenses-$185M

I won’t list all 227 listed by NCAA.

Anyhow NCAA study admits that the college accounting Fromm school to school is not uniform.

Now ...... you have proven my point. There are 893 college football programs spanning Div 1, Div 2, Div 3, NAIA, NJCAA. On low side say 20 are PROFITABLE that represents approx 2%. Let’s say 40 are PROFITABLE that represents 4%. We can continue with the simple math. But the facts are most football programs don’t turn a profit. The statement that these football programs bankroll all the other sports programs at a college is just false except for a small percentage.

You can google numerous articles about why have college sports. As you can see approximately 95% of colleges subsidize their athletics. Why??? To summarize here are a few reasons
Enrollment-many non student athletes choose a college because of game day social activity
Branding-school spirit and fan loyalty
Long term fan support and alumni camaraderie.
Sense of unity and pride among fans and alumni.
Revenue
Overall student experience.

This conversation began with football finding a way to play within the current covid nonsense rules. football found a way to play and it should be a template for other college sports to find a way to play. As indicated above college athletics touches many students other than the student athlete. In addition colleges recruited athletes of all sports to come to their college. College admin and AD’s should be finding ways to play not sit on their hands and tell student athletes sorry... season cancelled. Again... football did.

Originally Posted by baldbear

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Football found a way because of large network and conference network money.

Nope. Sorry. They found a way because they wanted to and came up with work arounds and put protocols in place that seem to be working.

Only football came up with the "work arounds and put protocols in place"? That makes no sense. Then every sport would be playing using those protocols. Even after cancelling their fall seasons the PAC12 and Big Ten came back to football seeing the money left on the table. This is an excerpt from the New York Times article about why football is being played:

"The decisions by the leagues — some publicly unflinching, others openly deliberating from one month to the next — carry enormous implications for college athletics. By playing football, even without every stadium packed with fans, schools across the country will collectively earn hundreds of millions of dollars from broadcast rights and sponsorships that will prop up budgets that had been threatened with severe cuts."

Power conference football is a huge money generating college sport. They are not playing a lot football at lower conferences because there is no network money. Don't be surprised if winter sports are cancelled by power conferences too--except mens basketball.

Quoting a New York Times article does not help your case.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The focus needs to be on Spallina, Levy and Frank. They are the coaches and the select the kids with final say. Selection committee is I am sure a bunch of no names. At the end the coaches have no ethics or didn’t do the job of review.

Some better be careful of where they currently are at right now. The Gtown program fell off the rails when RF decided to coach USA, and asst lost her job at BU. Takes a ton of time away from regular duty at their school. History will tell you not good combination

Yes, 100% on the coaches. Not sure that I agree with the assertion that coaching Team USA will have a negative impact on a coach or their program. Like him or not, JS is an excellent coach I'm sure he will be fine. North Carolina will always be one of the Top Programs simply because of all that the school has to offer.

Good luck to all who were selected to tryout for the US Team.

Originally US Lacrosse indicated that they would select 72 players to be invited to the US Team Tryouts, the actual number invited was cut to 50. Does anyone know why they reduced the number? Does anyone know how many players applied? I remember they said more than 500 players applied for the U19 team and they invited just over 100 to the tryouts. Obviously, there are a number of very well known current players who were not on the list of invitees. Did many not apply?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Football found a way because of large network and conference network money.

Nope. Sorry. They found a way because they wanted to and came up with work arounds and put protocols in place that seem to be working.

Only football came up with the "work arounds and put protocols in place"? That makes no sense. Then every sport would be playing using those protocols. Even after cancelling their fall seasons the PAC12 and Big Ten came back to football seeing the money left on the table. This is an excerpt from the New York Times article about why football is being played:

"The decisions by the leagues — some publicly unflinching, others openly deliberating from one month to the next — carry enormous implications for college athletics. By playing football, even without every stadium packed with fans, schools across the country will collectively earn hundreds of millions of dollars from broadcast rights and sponsorships that will prop up budgets that had been threatened with severe cuts."

Power conference football is a huge money generating college sport. They are not playing a lot football at lower conferences because there is no network money. Don't be surprised if winter sports are cancelled by power conferences too--except mens basketball.

Quoting a New York Times article does not help your case.

It does when the school officials state that revenue was a major factor for football's return

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Football found a way because of large network and conference network money.

Nope. Sorry. They found a way because they wanted to and came up with work arounds and put protocols in place that seem to be working.

Only football came up with the "work arounds and put protocols in place"? So if the soccer programs came to to the athletic director and president of a school with the same "work arounds and protocols" they would be playing? That makes no sense. Then everyone would be playing. Even after cancelling their fall seasons the PAC12 and Big Ten came back to football seeing the money left on the table. This is an excerpt from the New York Times article about why football is being played:

"The decisions by the leagues — some publicly unflinching, others openly deliberating from one month to the next — carry enormous implications for college athletics. By playing football, even without every stadium packed with fans, schools across the country will collectively earn hundreds of millions of dollars from broadcast rights and sponsorships that will prop up budgets that had been threatened with severe cuts."

Power conference football is a huge money generating college sport. They are not playing football at lower conferences because there is no network money. Don't be surprised if winter sports are cancelled by power conferences too--except mens basketball.

Oh really. ..,. Wrong.....See you should have googled before you answered. ....NCAA study in 2019 found only 20 of 1,000 college football teams were profitable. Many lower conference football is being played. Now..... do your homework and find out how many college basketball programs are profitable. The # will surprise you.

There are 674 collegiate football programs; 257 Division I, 167 Division II and 250 Division III. The "study" you note highlighted the top 20 most profitable programs as the result of legislation in some states to pay players (California leading the way). The 20th team made $28 million; I don't think #21 was in the red. Football is the number one generator of revenue which is passed along to other sports programs (for the Big East its basketball). The vast majority of D1 programs are profitable but here is the 20 noted in the 2019 NCAA report (which was not a "study"; each school must report to the NCAA the revenue and expenses for every sport every year):

Texas – $92 million
Tennessee – $70 million
LSU – $58 million
Michigan – $56 million
Notre Dame – $54 million
Georgia – $50 million
Ohio State – $50 million
Oklahoma – $48 million
Auburn – $47 million
Alabama – $46 million
Oregon – $40 million
Florida State – $39 million
Arkansas – $38 million
Washington – $38 million
Florida – $37 million
Texas A&M – $37 million
Penn State – $36 million
Michigan State – $32 million
USC – $29 million
South Carolina – $28 million

Basketball has more games but lower margins so again, most D1 programs are profitable. Louisville is the perennial #1 in this regard with profits over $40 million.

EDIT-You may be referencing the NCAA Annual report which represents 1,100 schools and ALL sports.

Cmon.... you went with the Athnet stats that didn’t mention EXPENSES. Sooo... I will give a few...

Texas-revenue-$224M. Expenses-$205M
Texas A&M-rev $212M. Expenses-$170M
Ohio State-rev-$210M. Expenses-$221M
Michigan-rev-$198M. Expenses-$191M
Georgia-rev-$174M. Expenses-$143M
Penn State-rev-$164M. Expenses-$160M
Alabama-rev-$164M. Expenses-$185M

I won’t list all 227 listed by NCAA.

Anyhow NCAA study admits that the college accounting Fromm school to school is not uniform.

Now ...... you have proven my point. There are 893 college football programs spanning Div 1, Div 2, Div 3, NAIA, NJCAA. On low side say 20 are PROFITABLE that represents approx 2%. Let’s say 40 are PROFITABLE that represents 4%. We can continue with the simple math. But the facts are most football programs don’t turn a profit. The statement that these football programs bankroll all the other sports programs at a college is just false except for a small percentage.

You can google numerous articles about why have college sports. As you can see approximately 95% of colleges subsidize their athletics. Why??? To summarize here are a few reasons
Enrollment-many non student athletes choose a college because of game day social activity
Branding-school spirit and fan loyalty
Long term fan support and alumni camaraderie.
Sense of unity and pride among fans and alumni.
Revenue
Overall student experience.

This conversation began with football finding a way to play within the current covid nonsense rules. football found a way to play and it should be a template for other college sports to find a way to play. As indicated above college athletics touches many students other than the student athlete. In addition colleges recruited athletes of all sports to come to their college. College admin and AD’s should be finding ways to play not sit on their hands and tell student athletes sorry... season cancelled. Again... football did.

I have enjoyed our discussion and should have used revenue as the major reason to bring back football, not profit. As you state accounting practices vary and even a Hollywood blockbuster does not show a profit, so revenue is more likely the culprit.

"College admin and AD’s should be finding ways to play not sit on their hands and tell student athletes sorry... season cancelled. Again... football did". Lets bring this back to lacrosse. Administrator and AD's are allowing football to play; football programs are not operating outside the schools. The AD's and administration are allowing the football teams to play, not the other way around. So administrators and AD's have found a way. The question is why hasn't it been applied to all sports equally? I would like your opinion on that because lacrosse, women's lacrosse, while we love the sport (I had an All-American daughter) is not a high priority for many schools. Why are administrations and AD's sitting on their hands? I have stated my opinion (money), which you don't agree with, so I ask yours.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I am hearing The 2020 class to get another year for Spring sports, but only might be that class.

My daughter plays a fall sport in college and they will be playing in the spring but still get their year back

Winter sports are also getting an extra year of eligibility due to covid uncertainty, even if they play some form of a season. Spring sports got an extra year this past spring for a partial season, so seems possible they won't get a second year for covid. Makes sense that players not rostered in 2020 (i.e. 2020 hs grads) get the extra year, though, since they have been/will be impacted similarly to 2020-21 fall and winter sports. Otherwise I can see a lot of freshman choosing to redshirt this year, maybe even those who would get meaningful playing time. My daughter's team is already planning for a condensed game schedule. Why give up a year of eligibility for a shortened season that might be canceled part way through, or player gets covid and misses 2-3 weeks by the time she is cleared to return, and some teams have larger than normal rosters due to 5th year seniors making it harder to earn playing time.

Because there is more to life than lacrosse .

True, but there are a number of seniors who returned this year for a 5th year as grad students. There are current seniors already planning to use their extra year of eligibility in 2022. There are plenty of players who take a 5th or even 6th year due to injury. There are college freshman who plan to attend graduate school, add a minor or specialization, etc. who would love to continue playing while they do it. There will be some who want to be done with college after four years and move on, but I think many players who love the sport would consider redshirting this year in hopes of four years of lacrosse that are more normal.

That is what makes it tougher

By giving the freshmen and extra year of sports in fall and winter, and the are actually playing there season The NCAA will have to give the freshmen Spring sports and extra year.

As you we now know in America if we do it for one,
We have to do it for ALL.

This way if you look at really only one group was lost that was seniors of Winter sports last year. Not bad. As Fall player there season and Winter played 80 percent of it.

Well it looks like D1 will announce soon that at least freshmen will get another year for Spring 2021 sports, if not all players potentially. The D2 and D3 councils just approved this week for all participants in spring 21.

I think you will see a lot of players transferring in summer if season doesn’t count against eligibility time. Just like Fall and Winter sports who have already been granted this relief. We knew that was going to happen based on Spring sports giving in Spring 2020.

Time will tell...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well it looks like D1 will announce soon that at least freshmen will get another year for Spring 2021 sports, if not all players potentially. The D2 and D3 councils just approved this week for all participants in spring 21.

I think you will see a lot of players transferring in summer if season doesn’t count against eligibility time. Just like Fall and Winter sports who have already been granted this relief. We knew that was going to happen based on Spring sports giving in Spring 2020.

Time will tell...

Lets just hope there is a spring.

"MIT became the latest NCAA Division III program to cancel its winter seasons because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

On Monday, MIT cancelled all winter varsity sports competition, which will impact men’s and women’s swimming and diving, men’s and women’s basketball, fencing, rifle, squash, and men’s and women’s indoor track and field.

In addition, the New England Women’s and Men’s Athletic Conference (NEWMAC) Presidents Council voted unanimously to suspend conference play and championships for the 2020-21 winter sports season due to the Covid-19 pandemic."

I watched the SBU team scrimmage and I am wondering what anyone else thought . My observations for what it’s worth .
Positives are this looks to be the best team SBU has ever had . They have some high end players T.O. , AK, K Huff, with more depth than they have had in the past . The goalie play looks above average and you know Spallina with have his zone defense ready .
The negatives are that they play such a weak schedule that not sure they will be battle tested for the multiple difficult games it takes in the tournament . It’s obvious JS plays favorites even with the calls he makes as a ref which can create some chemistry issues and most likely is the cause of so many players transferring out.
Side note it was obvious his selection ( make no mistake it was his selection) for the US team was just wrong , I am sure she is a good freshman player but looked to be not a top 4 midfielder or top 8 player on her own team .

The team has depth. Pulis, Kennedy and TO are high end. Goalie above average. Kids play hard. No opinion on defense because he will never play man. JS was not happy red team won and it annoyed him to give Accettella MVP. His attempt to hype the USA kid made him look foolish. He will use the weak schedule to promote his favorites. He plays favorites but some non-favorites are better than his early picks. Nice to watch lacrosse. JS is a media addict and found a way to get his hit.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well it looks like D1 will announce soon that at least freshmen will get another year for Spring 2021 sports, if not all players potentially. The D2 and D3 councils just approved this week for all participants in spring 21.

I think you will see a lot of players transferring in summer if season doesn’t count against eligibility time. Just like Fall and Winter sports who have already been granted this relief. We knew that was going to happen based on Spring sports giving in Spring 2020.

Time will tell...

Lets just hope there is a spring.

"MIT became the latest NCAA Division III program to cancel its winter seasons because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

On Monday, MIT cancelled all winter varsity sports competition, which will impact men’s and women’s swimming and diving, men’s and women’s basketball, fencing, rifle, squash, and men’s and women’s indoor track and field.

In addition, the New England Women’s and Men’s Athletic Conference (NEWMAC) Presidents Council voted unanimously to suspend conference play and championships for the 2020-21 winter sports season due to the Covid-19 pandemic."

Daughter plays at an ivy and was told this week they are not optimistic they will have an IVY season

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The team has depth. Pulis, Kennedy and TO are high end. Goalie above average. Kids play hard. No opinion on defense because he will never play man. JS was not happy red team won and it annoyed him to give Accettella MVP. His attempt to hype the USA kid made him look foolish. He will use the weak schedule to promote his favorites. He plays favorites but some non-favorites are better than his early picks. Nice to watch lacrosse. JS is a media addict and found a way to get his hit.

Watched was very very impressed and I am not an SB Fanboy They could very well have the best team they have had. Funny you say that because my daughter and I thought it looked like HE wanted the Red to win Took away two white goals and called a few charges on kenedy. Take away all the detest that is spewed on here what they JS and crew did was awesome more schools should do it or something similiar

Have they figured out the draw? .. I felt that was their biggest weakness during the recent tournament runs.. they could never get one when they needed it.

Originally Posted by baldbear

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Football found a way because of large network and conference network money.

Nope. Sorry. They found a way because they wanted to and came up with work arounds and put protocols in place that seem to be working.

Only football came up with the "work arounds and put protocols in place"? That makes no sense. Then every sport would be playing using those protocols. Even after cancelling their fall seasons the PAC12 and Big Ten came back to football seeing the money left on the table. This is an excerpt from the New York Times article about why football is being played:

"The decisions by the leagues — some publicly unflinching, others openly deliberating from one month to the next — carry enormous implications for college athletics. By playing football, even without every stadium packed with fans, schools across the country will collectively earn hundreds of millions of dollars from broadcast rights and sponsorships that will prop up budgets that had been threatened with severe cuts."

Power conference football is a huge money generating college sport. They are not playing a lot football at lower conferences because there is no network money. Don't be surprised if winter sports are cancelled by power conferences too--except mens basketball.

Quoting a New York Times article does not help your case.

It does when the school officials state that revenue was a major factor for football's return

With financial crisis at schools will cutting football be the way out

I agree with the above observation on SB. Fast and athletic team. JS will need to play zone as offenses were very strong but D obviously not coached on man to man defense.

AK, TO, KH looked very good. As noted goalies looked good stopping many on the door step shots.

As for freshmen USA player she didn’t start of JS, and wasn’t on midfield much. Not going to comment on her ability. Again not her issue for being selected. It is USA Head Coach Spallina and asst
Coach Levy issue. They know what they did and was on purpose.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

First off I’ve never really put my thoughts down in a note so forgive some of the naivety- A few questions where I have no idea where to ask-I have a high school soph and we are ready to pull the trigger and start contacting for recruiting.. I also should add that our club has helped us but I have some questions I don’t feel like asking our club.
Are any schools hosting campus visits/open houses for prospective students? (Not just athletes) I’m aware of the virtual visits.
If we visit a school on our own should we register as a visitor first? We almost used a day this past weekend to drive two hours and to hit some schools but we weren’t sure if our visit should be official or not? (Again not as an athlete)
We live in a “target rich environment” so we have seen many campuses through festivals, clinics or camps but have never been officially registered for a visit. I want to officially start visiting other schools on our radar so my daughter knows what to strive/work for. She’s not going to Hopkins and Goucher's way too small and not remote enough for example.
I’m familiar with the rules but the pace of the the 22’s recruiting has us anxious. We lost this summers camps so we are that much farther behind. I know that we have tape on our side but my daughter need to get out there beyond what we’ve seen so this process becomes real.
Another example is that there’s a school in our family on our radar that is Div 1 but is never at any showcases, tournaments etc. they don't have summer camps. I guess they just send in coaches when needed to recruit? I guess with tape they don’t need to travel or hold live events? Does this have a reflection on their operation?

Is there any word of dead period extending beyond January 1 think people have learned to live a little and kids need to get on campuses LEGALLY

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Have they figured out the draw? .. I felt that was their biggest weakness during the recent tournament runs.. they could never get one when they needed it.

Tournament runs? Did I miss something? What tournament runs?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I watched the SBU team scrimmage and I am wondering what anyone else thought . My observations for what it’s worth .
Positives are this looks to be the best team SBU has ever had . They have some high end players T.O. , AK, K Huff, with more depth than they have had in the past . The goalie play looks above average and you know Spallina with have his zone defense ready .
The negatives are that they play such a weak schedule that not sure they will be battle tested for the multiple difficult games it takes in the tournament . It’s obvious JS plays favorites even with the calls he makes as a ref which can create some chemistry issues and most likely is the cause of so many players transferring out.
Side note it was obvious his selection ( make no mistake it was his selection) for the US team was just wrong , I am sure she is a good freshman player but looked to be not a top 4 midfielder or top 8 player on her own team .

Great for the players, great marketing and use of social media. Stony Brook has been one of the best programs in the country for the past 8-9 years. Will this be their best team? Time will tell. As for their schedule being "weak"... Do we even know what their schedule will be? Stony Brook has improved their schedule in recent years and I would not call it weak.

As for The Defense... Zone or Man, it really doesn't matter. In order to win in The Tournament a team must play excellent Team Defense. Nice to talk about the offense and the players who score goals but Championships are won by teams that are built from back to front starting with the goalie.

At the end of the day, SBU will again be very good this year.

Good luck to all.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Have they figured out the draw? .. I felt that was their biggest weakness during the recent tournament runs.. they could never get one when they needed it.

Tournament runs? Did I miss something? What tournament runs?

Come on Bruh... you can be a hater but at least acknowledge some pretty decent recent results..

2019 lost in 2nd round to eventual champion Maryland, after beating the previous years champion JMU in round 1
2018 Lost in Quarter finals in O.T. to tournament runner-up B.C
2017 Lost Lost in Quarter finals to tournament champs Md by 1

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Have they figured out the draw? .. I felt that was their biggest weakness during the recent tournament runs.. they could never get one when they needed it.

Tournament runs? Did I miss something? What tournament runs?

Come on Bruh... you can be a hater but at least acknowledge some pretty decent recent results..

2019 lost in 2nd round to eventual champion Maryland, after beating the previous years champion JMU in round 1
2018 Lost in Quarter finals in O.T. to tournament runner-up B.C
2017 Lost Lost in Quarter finals to tournament champs Md by 1

Not a hater at all. IMHO... A "Tournament Run" would be getting to the Final Four or maybe even the Championship game.

Stony Brook is an excellent program, certainly one of the 15 Best Programs in the country (over the past 8-9 years). That said, They have been given way too much hype. Based on all the hype... Stony Brook has actually under achieved when it matters most in the NCAA Tournament.

Some are already starting with "This could be their best team ever".... They haven't played A single game (who knows if they will?).

Here is reality:

2013: # 10 at end of regular season. # 11 in the final Poll.. : They were 16 - 2 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

2014: # 20 at end of regular season. # 20 in the final Poll.. : They were 16 - 3 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2015: # 6 at end of regular season. # 11 in the final Poll.. : They were 18 - 1 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Princeton in round of 16.

2016: # 7 at end of regular season. # 8 in the final Poll.. : They were 15 - 3 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2017: # 4 at end of regular season. # 4 in the final Poll.. : They were 18 - 1 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in round of 8.

2018: # 1 at end of regular season. # 5 in the final Poll.. : They were 19 - 0 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Boston College in round of 8.

2019: # 15 at end of regular season. # 12 in the final Poll.. : They were 15 - 4 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

2020: ,,,,,,,,,,,

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well it looks like D1 will announce soon that at least freshmen will get another year for Spring 2021 sports, if not all players potentially. The D2 and D3 councils just approved this week for all participants in spring 21.

I think you will see a lot of players transferring in summer if season doesn’t count against eligibility time. Just like Fall and Winter sports who have already been granted this relief. We knew that was going to happen based on Spring sports giving in Spring 2020.

Time will tell...

Lets just hope there is a spring.

"MIT became the latest NCAA Division III program to cancel its winter seasons because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

On Monday, MIT cancelled all winter varsity sports competition, which will impact men’s and women’s swimming and diving, men’s and women’s basketball, fencing, rifle, squash, and men’s and women’s indoor track and field.

In addition, the New England Women’s and Men’s Athletic Conference (NEWMAC) Presidents Council voted unanimously to suspend conference play and championships for the 2020-21 winter sports season due to the Covid-19 pandemic."

Daughter plays at an ivy and was told this week they are not optimistic they will have an IVY season

Ivies?? All lefty schools. But hey maybe Biden wins and of course covid will miraculously be gone.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well it looks like D1 will announce soon that at least freshmen will get another year for Spring 2021 sports, if not all players potentially. The D2 and D3 councils just approved this week for all participants in spring 21.

I think you will see a lot of players transferring in summer if season doesn’t count against eligibility time. Just like Fall and Winter sports who have already been granted this relief. We knew that was going to happen based on Spring sports giving in Spring 2020.

Time will tell...

Lets just hope there is a spring.

"MIT became the latest NCAA Division III program to cancel its winter seasons because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

On Monday, MIT cancelled all winter varsity sports competition, which will impact men’s and women’s swimming and diving, men’s and women’s basketball, fencing, rifle, squash, and men’s and women’s indoor track and field.

In addition, the New England Women’s and Men’s Athletic Conference (NEWMAC) Presidents Council voted unanimously to suspend conference play and championships for the 2020-21 winter sports season due to the Covid-19 pandemic."

Daughter plays at an ivy and was told this week they are not optimistic they will have an IVY season

Ivies?? All lefty schools. But hey maybe Biden wins and of course covid will miraculously be gone.

Is there a school that isn’t a “Lefty School”?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Have they figured out the draw? .. I felt that was their biggest weakness during the recent tournament runs.. they could never get one when they needed it.

Tournament runs? Did I miss something? What tournament runs?

Come on Bruh... you can be a hater but at least acknowledge some pretty decent recent results..

2019 lost in 2nd round to eventual champion Maryland, after beating the previous years champion JMU in round 1
2018 Lost in Quarter finals in O.T. to tournament runner-up B.C
2017 Lost Lost in Quarter finals to tournament champs Md by 1

Not a hater at all. IMHO... A "Tournament Run" would be getting to the Final Four or maybe even the Championship game.

Stony Brook is an excellent program, certainly one of the 15 Best Programs in the country (over the past 8-9 years). That said, They have been given way too much hype. Based on all the hype... Stony Brook has actually under achieved when it matters most in the NCAA Tournament.

Some are already starting with "This could be their best team ever".... They haven't played A single game (who knows if they will?).

Here is reality:

2013: # 10 at end of regular season. # 11 in the final Poll.. : They were 16 - 2 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

2014: # 20 at end of regular season. # 20 in the final Poll.. : They were 16 - 3 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2015: # 6 at end of regular season. # 11 in the final Poll.. : They were 18 - 1 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Princeton in round of 16.

2016: # 7 at end of regular season. # 8 in the final Poll.. : They were 15 - 3 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2017: # 4 at end of regular season. # 4 in the final Poll.. : They were 18 - 1 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in round of 8.

2018: # 1 at end of regular season. # 5 in the final Poll.. : They were 19 - 0 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Boston College in round of 8.

2019: # 15 at end of regular season. # 12 in the final Poll.. : They were 15 - 4 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

2020: ,,,,,,,,,,,

In reality between the hype machine JS is and their weak schedule they will almost always be overrated. In season the fact that every year they beat a good team or 2 and everyone thinks they are better than they are failing to take into account some of these better teams they are playing usually have little time to devote to beating SB as they need to worry more about in conference games unlike SBU

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Have they figured out the draw? .. I felt that was their biggest weakness during the recent tournament runs.. they could never get one when they needed it.

Tournament runs? Did I miss something? What tournament runs?

Come on Bruh... you can be a hater but at least acknowledge some pretty decent recent results..

2019 lost in 2nd round to eventual champion Maryland, after beating the previous years champion JMU in round 1
2018 Lost in Quarter finals in O.T. to tournament runner-up B.C
2017 Lost Lost in Quarter finals to tournament champs Md by 1

Not a hater at all. IMHO... A "Tournament Run" would be getting to the Final Four or maybe even the Championship game.

Stony Brook is an excellent program, certainly one of the 15 Best Programs in the country (over the past 8-9 years). That said, They have been given way too much hype. Based on all the hype... Stony Brook has actually under achieved when it matters most in the NCAA Tournament.

Some are already starting with "This could be their best team ever".... They haven't played A single game (who knows if they will?).

Here is reality:

2013: # 10 at end of regular season. # 11 in the final Poll.. : They were 16 - 2 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

2014: # 20 at end of regular season. # 20 in the final Poll.. : They were 16 - 3 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2015: # 6 at end of regular season. # 11 in the final Poll.. : They were 18 - 1 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Princeton in round of 16.

2016: # 7 at end of regular season. # 8 in the final Poll.. : They were 15 - 3 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2017: # 4 at end of regular season. # 4 in the final Poll.. : They were 18 - 1 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in round of 8.

2018: # 1 at end of regular season. # 5 in the final Poll.. : They were 19 - 0 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Boston College in round of 8.

2019: # 15 at end of regular season. # 12 in the final Poll.. : They were 15 - 4 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

2020: ,,,,,,,,,,,

In reality between the hype machine JS is and their weak schedule they will almost always be overrated. In season the fact that every year they beat a good team or 2 and everyone thinks they are better than they are failing to take into account some of these better teams they are playing usually have little time to devote to beating SB as they need to worry more about in conference games unlike SBU

Not sure the week schedule point is accurate the past few years. SBU does play a difficult conference schedule but it appears as though they do their best to play a competitive non-conference schedule (at least the past few years). 2018 they had USC, Stanford, Denver, Northwestern, Towson, Hopkins, Penn State.

2019 they had Denver, Towson, Stanford, Princeton, Florida,Hopkins, USC, Penn State, Colorado.

2920 they had Syracuse, Florida, Towson, Princeton, USC, Stanford, Colorado, Hopkins.

It is no a Northwestern, Maryland, Virginia schedule but SBU looks like the do their best to schedule tough out of conference games.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well it looks like D1 will announce soon that at least freshmen will get another year for Spring 2021 sports, if not all players potentially. The D2 and D3 councils just approved this week for all participants in spring 21.

I think you will see a lot of players transferring in summer if season doesn’t count against eligibility time. Just like Fall and Winter sports who have already been granted this relief. We knew that was going to happen based on Spring sports giving in Spring 2020.

Time will tell...

Lets just hope there is a spring.

"MIT became the latest NCAA Division III program to cancel its winter seasons because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

On Monday, MIT cancelled all winter varsity sports competition, which will impact men’s and women’s swimming and diving, men’s and women’s basketball, fencing, rifle, squash, and men’s and women’s indoor track and field.

In addition, the New England Women’s and Men’s Athletic Conference (NEWMAC) Presidents Council voted unanimously to suspend conference play and championships for the 2020-21 winter sports season due to the Covid-19 pandemic."

Daughter plays at an ivy and was told this week they are not optimistic they will have an IVY season

Ivies?? All lefty schools. But hey maybe Biden wins and of course covid will miraculously be gone.

Is there a school that isn’t a “Lefty School”?

Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments. Shame

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well it looks like D1 will announce soon that at least freshmen will get another year for Spring 2021 sports, if not all players potentially. The D2 and D3 councils just approved this week for all participants in spring 21.

I think you will see a lot of players transferring in summer if season doesn’t count against eligibility time. Just like Fall and Winter sports who have already been granted this relief. We knew that was going to happen based on Spring sports giving in Spring 2020.

Time will tell...

Lets just hope there is a spring.

"MIT became the latest NCAA Division III program to cancel its winter seasons because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

On Monday, MIT cancelled all winter varsity sports competition, which will impact men’s and women’s swimming and diving, men’s and women’s basketball, fencing, rifle, squash, and men’s and women’s indoor track and field.

In addition, the New England Women’s and Men’s Athletic Conference (NEWMAC) Presidents Council voted unanimously to suspend conference play and championships for the 2020-21 winter sports season due to the Covid-19 pandemic."

Daughter plays at an ivy and was told this week they are not optimistic they will have an IVY season

Ivies?? All lefty schools. But hey maybe Biden wins and of course covid will miraculously be gone.

Is there a school that isn’t a “Lefty School”?

Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments. Shame

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well it looks like D1 will announce soon that at least freshmen will get another year for Spring 2021 sports, if not all players potentially. The D2 and D3 councils just approved this week for all participants in spring 21.

I think you will see a lot of players transferring in summer if season doesn’t count against eligibility time. Just like Fall and Winter sports who have already been granted this relief. We knew that was going to happen based on Spring sports giving in Spring 2020.

Time will tell...

Lets just hope there is a spring.

"MIT became the latest NCAA Division III program to cancel its winter seasons because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

On Monday, MIT cancelled all winter varsity sports competition, which will impact men’s and women’s swimming and diving, men’s and women’s basketball, fencing, rifle, squash, and men’s and women’s indoor track and field.

In addition, the New England Women’s and Men’s Athletic Conference (NEWMAC) Presidents Council voted unanimously to suspend conference play and championships for the 2020-21 winter sports season due to the Covid-19 pandemic."

Daughter plays at an ivy and was told this week they are not optimistic they will have an IVY season

Ivies?? All lefty schools. But hey maybe Biden wins and of course covid will miraculously be gone.

Is there a school that isn’t a “Lefty School”?

Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments. Shame

Ignorant statement.

Ivys absolutely will not play

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Have they figured out the draw? .. I felt that was their biggest weakness during the recent tournament runs.. they could never get one when they needed it.

Tournament runs? Did I miss something? What tournament runs?

Come on Bruh... you can be a hater but at least acknowledge some pretty decent recent results..

2019 lost in 2nd round to eventual champion Maryland, after beating the previous years champion JMU in round 1
2018 Lost in Quarter finals in O.T. to tournament runner-up B.C
2017 Lost Lost in Quarter finals to tournament champs Md by 1

Not a hater at all. IMHO... A "Tournament Run" would be getting to the Final Four or maybe even the Championship game.

Stony Brook is an excellent program, certainly one of the 15 Best Programs in the country (over the past 8-9 years). That said, They have been given way too much hype. Based on all the hype... Stony Brook has actually under achieved when it matters most in the NCAA Tournament.

Some are already starting with "This could be their best team ever".... They haven't played A single game (who knows if they will?).

Here is reality:

2013: # 10 at end of regular season. # 11 in the final Poll.. : They were 16 - 2 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

2014: # 20 at end of regular season. # 20 in the final Poll.. : They were 16 - 3 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2015: # 6 at end of regular season. # 11 in the final Poll.. : They were 18 - 1 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Princeton in round of 16.

2016: # 7 at end of regular season. # 8 in the final Poll.. : They were 15 - 3 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2017: # 4 at end of regular season. # 4 in the final Poll.. : They were 18 - 1 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in round of 8.

2018: # 1 at end of regular season. # 5 in the final Poll.. : They were 19 - 0 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Boston College in round of 8.

2019: # 15 at end of regular season. # 12 in the final Poll.. : They were 15 - 4 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

2020: ,,,,,,,,,,,

In reality between the hype machine JS is and their weak schedule they will almost always be overrated. In season the fact that every year they beat a good team or 2 and everyone thinks they are better than they are failing to take into account some of these better teams they are playing usually have little time to devote to beating SB as they need to worry more about in conference games unlike SBU

Not sure the weak schedule point is accurate the past few years. SBU does not play a difficult conference schedule but it appears as though they do their best to play a competitive non-conference schedule (at least the past few years). 2018 they had USC, Stanford, Denver, Northwestern, Towson, Hopkins, Penn State.

2019 they had Denver, Towson, Stanford, Princeton, Florida,Hopkins, USC, Penn State, Colorado.

2920 they had Syracuse, Florida, Towson, Princeton, USC, Stanford, Colorado, Hopkins.

It is not a Northwestern, Maryland, Virginia etc... schedule but SBU looks like they are doing their best to schedule tough out of conference games.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Ivys absolutely will not play

Agreed doesn’t look likely

Lets just hope there is a spring.

"MIT became the latest NCAA Division III program to cancel its winter seasons because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

On Monday, MIT cancelled all winter varsity sports competition, which will impact men’s and women’s swimming and diving, men’s and women’s basketball, fencing, rifle, squash, and men’s and women’s indoor track and field.

In addition, the New England Women’s and Men’s Athletic Conference (NEWMAC) Presidents Council voted unanimously to suspend conference play and championships for the 2020-21 winter sports season due to the Covid-19 pandemic."[/quote]

Daughter plays at an ivy and was told this week they are not optimistic they will have an IVY season[/quote]

Ivies?? All lefty schools. But hey maybe Biden wins and of course covid will miraculously be gone.[/quote]

Is there a school that isn’t a “Lefty School”?[/quote]

Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments. Shame[/quote]

Ignorant statement.[/quote]

Tell that to the kids at Dartmouth where 5 sports were just cut....

https://www.thedartmouth.com/articl...ts-teams-and-closes-hanover-country-club

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Something deeper than athletics.... The administration needs those "admissions slots" for a demographic that differs from that of those who participate in those sports. It is not about the money, the university will end up giveing more $$ in need based financial aid to the students who are admitted in place of the student athletes.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

If money is truly the reason for cutting athletic teams Brown and Cornell could head in that direction. Apparently, Cornell had an operating deficit of $104,236,000 for 2019. Brown appears to have had a $25,362,000 deficit for 2019. Dartmouth had a surplus of $32,607.000 and they are cutting teams. The rest of the IVY's seem to be doing OK. The remaining 5 schools all had operating surpluses of $200,000,000 or more...

Penn - $519,173,000
Princeton - $405,536,000
Harvard - $297,900,000
Yale - $270,491,000
Columbia - $222,949,000

School Endowment Value as of 2019 Operational Surplus (Deficit) 2019

Brown University $4,200,000,000 ($25,362,000)
Columbia University $10,950,000,000 $222,949,000
Cornell University $7,300,000,000 ($104,236,000)
Dartmouth College $5,700,000,000 $32,607,000
Harvard University $40,900,000,000 $297,900,000
University of Pennsylvania $14,700,000,000 $519,173,000
Princeton University $26,100,000,000 $405,536,000
Yale University $30,300,000,000 $270,491,000

Sources: Department of Education, Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, Yale University

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

If money is truly the reason for cutting athletic teams Brown and Cornell could head in that direction. Apparently, Cornell had an operating deficit of $104,236,000 for 2019. Brown appears to have had a $25,362,000 deficit for 2019. Dartmouth had a surplus of $32,607.000 and they are cutting teams. The rest of the IVY's seem to be doing OK. The remaining 5 schools all had operating surpluses of $200,000,000 or more...

Penn - $519,173,000
Princeton - $405,536,000
Harvard - $297,900,000
Yale - $270,491,000
Columbia - $222,949,000

School Endowment Value as of 2019 Operational Surplus (Deficit) 2019

Brown University $4,200,000,000 ($25,362,000)
Columbia University $10,950,000,000 $222,949,000
Cornell University $7,300,000,000 ($104,236,000)
Dartmouth College $5,700,000,000 $32,607,000
Harvard University $40,900,000,000 $297,900,000
University of Pennsylvania $14,700,000,000 $519,173,000
Princeton University $26,100,000,000 $405,536,000
Yale University $30,300,000,000 $270,491,000

Sources: Department of Education, Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, Yale University

Great stats. But did you read the statement. Ivies do not have an investment in student athletes. Most SA pay to go to an ivy. The above statement may be true. Ivy schools might rather give aid to a need based slot than a SA. It’s no secret the SA’s are not backed by the schools as a whole.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Something deeper than athletics.... The administration needs those "admissions slots" for a demographic that differs from that of those who participate in those sports. It is not about the money, the university will end up giveing more $$ in need based financial aid to the students who are admitted in place of the student athletes.

BINGO

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

If money is truly the reason for cutting athletic teams Brown and Cornell could head in that direction. Apparently, Cornell had an operating deficit of $104,236,000 for 2019. Brown appears to have had a $25,362,000 deficit for 2019. Dartmouth had a surplus of $32,607.000 and they are cutting teams. The rest of the IVY's seem to be doing OK. The remaining 5 schools all had operating surpluses of $200,000,000 or more...

Penn - $519,173,000
Princeton - $405,536,000
Harvard - $297,900,000
Yale - $270,491,000
Columbia - $222,949,000

School Endowment Value as of 2019 Operational Surplus (Deficit) 2019

Brown University $4,200,000,000 ($25,362,000)
Columbia University $10,950,000,000 $222,949,000
Cornell University $7,300,000,000 ($104,236,000)
Dartmouth College $5,700,000,000 $32,607,000
Harvard University $40,900,000,000 $297,900,000
University of Pennsylvania $14,700,000,000 $519,173,000
Princeton University $26,100,000,000 $405,536,000
Yale University $30,300,000,000 $270,491,000

Sources: Department of Education, Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, Yale University

Great stats. But did you read the statement. Ivies do not have an investment in student athletes. Most SA pay to go to an ivy. The above statement may be true. Ivy schools might rather give aid to a need based slot than a SA. It’s no secret the SA’s are not backed by the schools as a whole.

Where is your evidence to support your claim that "Ivy's do not have an investment in student athletes"? What schools are you comparing the Ivy's with? Not all Ivy's are the same, I would imagine some support their student athletes more than others. With the exception of The top BCS Football programs (Power 5) and Big Time Mens and Women's Basketball I bet the Ivy's are more competitive than most schools in most sports. Just my gut.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

If money is truly the reason for cutting athletic teams Brown and Cornell could head in that direction. Apparently, Cornell had an operating deficit of $104,236,000 for 2019. Brown appears to have had a $25,362,000 deficit for 2019. Dartmouth had a surplus of $32,607.000 and they are cutting teams. The rest of the IVY's seem to be doing OK. The remaining 5 schools all had operating surpluses of $200,000,000 or more...

Penn - $519,173,000
Princeton - $405,536,000
Harvard - $297,900,000
Yale - $270,491,000
Columbia - $222,949,000

School Endowment Value as of 2019 Operational Surplus (Deficit) 2019

Brown University $4,200,000,000 ($25,362,000)
Columbia University $10,950,000,000 $222,949,000
Cornell University $7,300,000,000 ($104,236,000)
Dartmouth College $5,700,000,000 $32,607,000
Harvard University $40,900,000,000 $297,900,000
University of Pennsylvania $14,700,000,000 $519,173,000
Princeton University $26,100,000,000 $405,536,000
Yale University $30,300,000,000 $270,491,000

Sources: Department of Education, Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, Yale University

Great stats. But did you read the statement. Ivies do not have an investment in student athletes. Most SA pay to go to an ivy. The above statement may be true. Ivy schools might rather give aid to a need based slot than a SA. It’s no secret the SA’s are not backed by the schools as a whole.

Does Stanford not back their Student Athletes? Stanford has been considered one of if not the best college athletic program for many years and they just cut 11 Varsity sports. BTW, Stanford has the third largest endowment of any University ($27,700,000 approx)

Sounds like you have an ax to grind for some reason.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

If money is truly the reason for cutting athletic teams Brown and Cornell could head in that direction. Apparently, Cornell had an operating deficit of $104,236,000 for 2019. Brown appears to have had a $25,362,000 deficit for 2019. Dartmouth had a surplus of $32,607.000 and they are cutting teams. The rest of the IVY's seem to be doing OK. The remaining 5 schools all had operating surpluses of $200,000,000 or more...

Penn - $519,173,000
Princeton - $405,536,000
Harvard - $297,900,000
Yale - $270,491,000
Columbia - $222,949,000

School Endowment Value as of 2019 Operational Surplus (Deficit) 2019

Brown University $4,200,000,000 ($25,362,000)
Columbia University $10,950,000,000 $222,949,000
Cornell University $7,300,000,000 ($104,236,000)
Dartmouth College $5,700,000,000 $32,607,000
Harvard University $40,900,000,000 $297,900,000
University of Pennsylvania $14,700,000,000 $519,173,000
Princeton University $26,100,000,000 $405,536,000
Yale University $30,300,000,000 $270,491,000

Sources: Department of Education, Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, Yale University

Great stats. But did you read the statement. Ivies do not have an investment in student athletes. Most SA pay to go to an ivy. The above statement may be true. Ivy schools might rather give aid to a need based slot than a SA. It’s no secret the SA’s are not backed by the schools as a whole.

Where is your evidence to support your claim that "Ivy's do not have an investment in student athletes"? What schools are you comparing the Ivy's with? Not all Ivy's are the same, I would imagine some support their student athletes more than others. With the exception of The top BCS Football programs (Power 5) and Big Time Mens and Women's Basketball I bet the Ivy's are more competitive than most schools in most sports. Just my gut.

have you seen the facilities at Yale? stadium is a dump

"[/quote]

have you seen the facilities at Yale? stadium is a dump[/quote]

I have been to Yale and the stadium is fine, certainly adequate for men’s and women’s lacrosse. They could fix the broken windows on the adjacent structure but the field and stadium are fine. It doesn’t seem to hinder their men’s team and if the administration is not supporting them the coach should ask for things to remain as they are. Not sure what the issue is on the women’s side.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

If money is truly the reason for cutting athletic teams Brown and Cornell could head in that direction. Apparently, Cornell had an operating deficit of $104,236,000 for 2019. Brown appears to have had a $25,362,000 deficit for 2019. Dartmouth had a surplus of $32,607.000 and they are cutting teams. The rest of the IVY's seem to be doing OK. The remaining 5 schools all had operating surpluses of $200,000,000 or more...

Penn - $519,173,000
Princeton - $405,536,000
Harvard - $297,900,000
Yale - $270,491,000
Columbia - $222,949,000

School Endowment Value as of 2019 Operational Surplus (Deficit) 2019

Brown University $4,200,000,000 ($25,362,000)
Columbia University $10,950,000,000 $222,949,000
Cornell University $7,300,000,000 ($104,236,000)
Dartmouth College $5,700,000,000 $32,607,000
Harvard University $40,900,000,000 $297,900,000
University of Pennsylvania $14,700,000,000 $519,173,000
Princeton University $26,100,000,000 $405,536,000
Yale University $30,300,000,000 $270,491,000

Sources: Department of Education, Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, Yale University

Great stats. But did you read the statement. Ivies do not have an investment in student athletes. Most SA pay to go to an ivy. The above statement may be true. Ivy schools might rather give aid to a need based slot than a SA. It’s no secret the SA’s are not backed by the schools as a whole.

Does Stanford not back their Student Athletes? Stanford has been considered one of if not the best college athletic program for many years and they just cut 11 Varsity sports. BTW, Stanford has the third largest endowment of any University ($27,700,000 approx)

Sounds like you have an ax to grind for some reason.

The Stanford Cut was for non financial reasons

"the “optics” of “country-club
staples” such as squash and golf help explain why these sports got
slashed. “At a time when racial justice and diversity have become a
more open national conversation,” Korn wrote, “the sports being
eliminated are the ones that tend to draw overwhelmingly white,
often wealthy players.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/with-b...staples-like-golf-and-tennis-11595170801

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

If money is truly the reason for cutting athletic teams Brown and Cornell could head in that direction. Apparently, Cornell had an operating deficit of $104,236,000 for 2019. Brown appears to have had a $25,362,000 deficit for 2019. Dartmouth had a surplus of $32,607.000 and they are cutting teams. The rest of the IVY's seem to be doing OK. The remaining 5 schools all had operating surpluses of $200,000,000 or more...

Penn - $519,173,000
Princeton - $405,536,000
Harvard - $297,900,000
Yale - $270,491,000
Columbia - $222,949,000

School Endowment Value as of 2019 Operational Surplus (Deficit) 2019

Brown University $4,200,000,000 ($25,362,000)
Columbia University $10,950,000,000 $222,949,000
Cornell University $7,300,000,000 ($104,236,000)
Dartmouth College $5,700,000,000 $32,607,000
Harvard University $40,900,000,000 $297,900,000
University of Pennsylvania $14,700,000,000 $519,173,000
Princeton University $26,100,000,000 $405,536,000
Yale University $30,300,000,000 $270,491,000

Sources: Department of Education, Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, Yale University

Great stats. But did you read the statement. Ivies do not have an investment in student athletes. Most SA pay to go to an ivy. The above statement may be true. Ivy schools might rather give aid to a need based slot than a SA. It’s no secret the SA’s are not backed by the schools as a whole.

Does Stanford not back their Student Athletes? Stanford has been considered one of if not the best college athletic program for many years and they just cut 11 Varsity sports. BTW, Stanford has the third largest endowment of any University ($27,700,000 approx)

Sounds like you have an ax to grind for some reason.

Stanford isn’t an ivy. Geez. Cmon. The thread was discussing the Ivy League schools.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

If money is truly the reason for cutting athletic teams Brown and Cornell could head in that direction. Apparently, Cornell had an operating deficit of $104,236,000 for 2019. Brown appears to have had a $25,362,000 deficit for 2019. Dartmouth had a surplus of $32,607.000 and they are cutting teams. The rest of the IVY's seem to be doing OK. The remaining 5 schools all had operating surpluses of $200,000,000 or more...

Penn - $519,173,000
Princeton - $405,536,000
Harvard - $297,900,000
Yale - $270,491,000
Columbia - $222,949,000

School Endowment Value as of 2019 Operational Surplus (Deficit) 2019

Brown University $4,200,000,000 ($25,362,000)
Columbia University $10,950,000,000 $222,949,000
Cornell University $7,300,000,000 ($104,236,000)
Dartmouth College $5,700,000,000 $32,607,000
Harvard University $40,900,000,000 $297,900,000
University of Pennsylvania $14,700,000,000 $519,173,000
Princeton University $26,100,000,000 $405,536,000
Yale University $30,300,000,000 $270,491,000

Sources: Department of Education, Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, Yale University

Great stats. But did you read the statement. Ivies do not have an investment in student athletes. Most SA pay to go to an ivy. The above statement may be true. Ivy schools might rather give aid to a need based slot than a SA. It’s no secret the SA’s are not backed by the schools as a whole.

Does Stanford not back their Student Athletes? Stanford has been considered one of if not the best college athletic program for many years and they just cut 11 Varsity sports. BTW, Stanford has the third largest endowment of any University ($27,700,000 approx)

Sounds like you have an ax to grind for some reason.

The Stanford Cut was for non financial reasons

"the “optics” of “country-club
staples” such as squash and golf help explain why these sports got
slashed. “At a time when racial justice and diversity have become a
more open national conversation,” Korn wrote, “the sports being
eliminated are the ones that tend to draw overwhelmingly white,
often wealthy players.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/with-b...staples-like-golf-and-tennis-11595170801

Dartmouth cuts were to redirect admission slots to individuals from certain socioeconomic backgrounds which differ from the athletes from the teams being eliminated.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

If money is truly the reason for cutting athletic teams Brown and Cornell could head in that direction. Apparently, Cornell had an operating deficit of $104,236,000 for 2019. Brown appears to have had a $25,362,000 deficit for 2019. Dartmouth had a surplus of $32,607.000 and they are cutting teams. The rest of the IVY's seem to be doing OK. The remaining 5 schools all had operating surpluses of $200,000,000 or more...

Penn - $519,173,000
Princeton - $405,536,000
Harvard - $297,900,000
Yale - $270,491,000
Columbia - $222,949,000

School Endowment Value as of 2019 Operational Surplus (Deficit) 2019

Brown University $4,200,000,000 ($25,362,000)
Columbia University $10,950,000,000 $222,949,000
Cornell University $7,300,000,000 ($104,236,000)
Dartmouth College $5,700,000,000 $32,607,000
Harvard University $40,900,000,000 $297,900,000
University of Pennsylvania $14,700,000,000 $519,173,000
Princeton University $26,100,000,000 $405,536,000
Yale University $30,300,000,000 $270,491,000

Sources: Department of Education, Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, Yale University

Great stats. But did you read the statement. Ivies do not have an investment in student athletes. Most SA pay to go to an ivy. The above statement may be true. Ivy schools might rather give aid to a need based slot than a SA. It’s no secret the SA’s are not backed by the schools as a whole.

Does Stanford not back their Student Athletes? Stanford has been considered one of if not the best college athletic program for many years and they just cut 11 Varsity sports. BTW, Stanford has the third largest endowment of any University ($27,700,000 approx)

Sounds like you have an ax to grind for some reason.

Stanford isn’t an ivy. Geez. Cmon. The thread was discussing the Ivy League schools.

Still haven’t read anything that indicates “ivy’s do not support there athletes / teams”. Just some guys opinion. I would guess that some Ivy’s give more support than others but overall I think the guy has an issue for some reason. My guess would be sour grapes.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

If money is truly the reason for cutting athletic teams Brown and Cornell could head in that direction. Apparently, Cornell had an operating deficit of $104,236,000 for 2019. Brown appears to have had a $25,362,000 deficit for 2019. Dartmouth had a surplus of $32,607.000 and they are cutting teams. The rest of the IVY's seem to be doing OK. The remaining 5 schools all had operating surpluses of $200,000,000 or more...

Penn - $519,173,000
Princeton - $405,536,000
Harvard - $297,900,000
Yale - $270,491,000
Columbia - $222,949,000

School Endowment Value as of 2019 Operational Surplus (Deficit) 2019

Brown University $4,200,000,000 ($25,362,000)
Columbia University $10,950,000,000 $222,949,000
Cornell University $7,300,000,000 ($104,236,000)
Dartmouth College $5,700,000,000 $32,607,000
Harvard University $40,900,000,000 $297,900,000
University of Pennsylvania $14,700,000,000 $519,173,000
Princeton University $26,100,000,000 $405,536,000
Yale University $30,300,000,000 $270,491,000

Sources: Department of Education, Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, Yale University

Great stats. But did you read the statement. Ivies do not have an investment in student athletes. Most SA pay to go to an ivy. The above statement may be true. Ivy schools might rather give aid to a need based slot than a SA. It’s no secret the SA’s are not backed by the schools as a whole.

Where is your evidence to support your claim that "Ivy's do not have an investment in student athletes"? What schools are you comparing the Ivy's with? Not all Ivy's are the same, I would imagine some support their student athletes more than others. With the exception of The top BCS Football programs (Power 5) and Big Time Mens and Women's Basketball I bet the Ivy's are more competitive than most schools in most sports. Just my gut.

have you seen the facilities at Yale? stadium is a dump

Not true... but if that is how you support your argument you lose credibility.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Most Ivy's have been supporting over 30 varsity sports for a long time. Schools like Texas, Alabama, University of Miami only offer about 16 varsity teams. Notre Dame and Northwestern offer 19 or 20 varsity sports. Ivy's have a very long and rich athletic tradition and in fact have supported more athletes than just about all schools. They absolutely invest in their student athletes.

---- "Stanford isn’t an ivy. Geez. Cmon. The thread was discussing the Ivy League schools". ----

Someone interjected by posting a link to an article about Dartmouth cutting 5 programs as proof that "The Ivy's do not invest in their athletes". It was pointed out that Stanford cut 11 programs and that Stanford has long been considered to have one of the very best athletic programs in the country. The reality is that the programs were cut for political reasons not financial reasons.
Stanford, as well as the Ivy's (although they are not all the same) have demonstrated for many years that the do invest and support their student athletes. The Ivy's(collectively) made a decision to limit how much they were going to compromise their academics in order to remain competitive with the "Big Time" Football Programs.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Most Ivy's have been supporting over 30 varsity sports for a long time. Schools like Texas, Alabama, University of Miami only offer about 16 varsity teams. Notre Dame and Northwestern offer 19 or 20 varsity sports. Ivy's have a very long and rich athletic tradition and in fact have supported more athletes than just about all schools. They absolutely invest in their student athletes.

Please explain how they support???? Ivies could have 100 varsity sports because The ivy student athletes PAY to play. The schools mentioned above provide athletic $ to SA’s. This goes to the discussion earlier in thread that the ivies will cancel their season in a nano second. That is where there is no support for SA’s that they recruited. And don’t be surprised when the ivies follow the Stanford business model and cut the certain sports that promote white/wealthy participation.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Most Ivy's have been supporting over 30 varsity sports for a long time. Schools like Texas, Alabama, University of Miami only offer about 16 varsity teams. Notre Dame and Northwestern offer 19 or 20 varsity sports. Ivy's have a very long and rich athletic tradition and in fact have supported more athletes than just about all schools. They absolutely invest in their student athletes.

Please explain how they support???? Ivies could have 100 varsity sports because . The schools mentioned above provide athletic $ to SA’s. This goes to the discussion earlier in thread that the ivies will cancel their season in a nano second. That is where there is no support for SA’s that they recruited. And don’t be surprised when the ivies follow the Stanford business model and cut the certain sports that promote white/wealthy participation.

Sorry but you are either ignorant or uninformed. Your above statement "This goes to the discussion earlier in thread that the ivies will cancel their season in a nano second" implies that other schools / conferences will most certainly have a season when in fact they all cancelled their seasons last spring. By your logic, the schools that you are talking about would have "played their season" because they are "invested" in their student athletes. Your statement: "The ivy student athletes PAY to play" is also ignorant as there are many Student Athletes at Ivy League Universities receiving significant financial aid. At many Ivy schools the number of athletes receiving financial aid is grater than The NCAA allotment for that given sport.

Your point regarding The Ivy's following the Stanford Business Model is probably not inaccurate as Dartmouth has already done it. The difference is that Most schools do not even offer some of the so called country club sports such as Squash, water polo, fencing, crew etc.... so there is no need to cut them. I would say Lacrosse is more vulnerable at schools that do not offer the country club sports.

BTW, for most schools and teams "Athletic Scholarships" are reductions in "cost of attendance" for the student athlete. No $$ actually are paid. That said, there are certain "Programs" that actually generate not only revenue but also a profit. Some of those Programs (Think Big Time Football) actually cut a check to the university for the total cost to attend for their 85 full scholarship players. Not only do these programs pay the university for "total cost to attend" they provide a financial stipend to the athletes.

The premise that Ivy League Schools do not support their student athletes is simply inaccurate.

Please let us know the long list of schools who support their athletic programs more than the Ivy's...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Most Ivy's have been supporting over 30 varsity sports for a long time. Schools like Texas, Alabama, University of Miami only offer about 16 varsity teams. Notre Dame and Northwestern offer 19 or 20 varsity sports. Ivy's have a very long and rich athletic tradition and in fact have supported more athletes than just about all schools. They absolutely invest in their student athletes.

Please explain how they support???? Ivies could have 100 varsity sports because The ivy student athletes PAY to play. The schools mentioned above provide athletic $ to SA’s. This goes to the discussion earlier in thread that the ivies will cancel their season in a nano second. That is where there is no support for SA’s that they recruited. And don’t be surprised when the ivies follow the Stanford business model and cut the certain sports that promote white/wealthy participation.

Oh, I don't know how they support the teams.... Maybe with... Coaching, Facilities i.e. stadiums, practice fields, locker rooms, weight rooms, training rooms, Medical staff including mental health professionals, access to sports psychologists, Trainers, Strength coaches, Alumi mentor programs, uniforms, travel expenses, Hotel rooms for away games, equipment, team gear (swag), cleats, turf shoes, training shoes, Alumni networking events etc...

As for the Ivy's following the Stanford Model they very well may do just that. As the previous post points out at least the Ivy's have the country club sports to cut. If schools are being pressured to free up admission slots so that certain individuals from particular demographics can be served Lacrosse could be on the chopping block at schools that do not have alternatives. Don't see that happening but you never know.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Most Ivy's have been supporting over 30 varsity sports for a long time. Schools like Texas, Alabama, University of Miami only offer about 16 varsity teams. Notre Dame and Northwestern offer 19 or 20 varsity sports. Ivy's have a very long and rich athletic tradition and in fact have supported more athletes than just about all schools. They absolutely invest in their student athletes.

Please explain how they support???? Ivies could have 100 varsity sports because . The schools mentioned above provide athletic $ to SA’s. This goes to the discussion earlier in thread that the ivies will cancel their season in a nano second. That is where there is no support for SA’s that they recruited. And don’t be surprised when the ivies follow the Stanford business model and cut the certain sports that promote white/wealthy participation.

Sorry but you are either ignorant or uninformed. Your above statement "This goes to the discussion earlier in thread that the ivies will cancel their season in a nano second" implies that other schools / conferences will most certainly have a season when in fact they all cancelled their seasons last spring. By your logic, the schools that you are talking about would have "played their season" because they are "invested" in their student athletes. Your statement: "The ivy student athletes PAY to play" is also ignorant as there are many Student Athletes at Ivy League Universities receiving significant financial aid. At many Ivy schools the number of athletes receiving financial aid is grater than The NCAA allotment for that given sport.

Your point regarding The Ivy's following the Stanford Business Model is probably not inaccurate as Dartmouth has already done it. The difference is that Most schools do not even offer some of the so called country club sports such as Squash, water polo, fencing, crew etc.... so there is no need to cut them. I would say Lacrosse is more vulnerable at schools that do not offer the country club sports.

BTW, for most schools and teams "Athletic Scholarships" are reductions in "cost of attendance" for the student athlete. No $$ actually are paid. That said, there are certain "Programs" that actually generate not only revenue but also a profit. Some of those Programs (Think Big Time Football) actually cut a check to the university for the total cost to attend for their 85 full scholarship players. Not only do these programs pay the university for "total cost to attend" they provide a financial stipend to the athletes.

The premise that Ivy League Schools do not support their student athletes is simply inaccurate.

Please let us know the long list of schools who support their athletic programs more than the Ivy's...

Provide data that supports your contention that more athletes at ivies receive financial support that is greater than the NCAA allotment.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Most Ivy's have been supporting over 30 varsity sports for a long time. Schools like Texas, Alabama, University of Miami only offer about 16 varsity teams. Notre Dame and Northwestern offer 19 or 20 varsity sports. Ivy's have a very long and rich athletic tradition and in fact have supported more athletes than just about all schools. They absolutely invest in their student athletes.

Please explain how they support???? Ivies could have 100 varsity sports because The ivy student athletes PAY to play. The schools mentioned above provide athletic $ to SA’s. This goes to the discussion earlier in thread that the ivies will cancel their season in a nano second. That is where there is no support for SA’s that they recruited. And don’t be surprised when the ivies follow the Stanford business model and cut the certain sports that promote white/wealthy participation.

You state:

“The schools mentioned above provide athletic $ to SA’s.”

Really, the school provides “athletic $” to the student athlete? No, they do not.

Do you think the school is paying money therefore they are “invested” in the athletes?

How do you think this works? Do you be believe that the team or the athletic department actually gives the student athlete $$$? Does the SA then pay the tuition, room and board with that “athletic money”?

Oh brother....

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Most Ivy's have been supporting over 30 varsity sports for a long time. Schools like Texas, Alabama, University of Miami only offer about 16 varsity teams. Notre Dame and Northwestern offer 19 or 20 varsity sports. Ivy's have a very long and rich athletic tradition and in fact have supported more athletes than just about all schools. They absolutely invest in their student athletes.

Please explain how they support???? Ivies could have 100 varsity sports because The ivy student athletes PAY to play. The schools mentioned above provide athletic $ to SA’s. This goes to the discussion earlier in thread that the ivies will cancel their season in a nano second. That is where there is no support for SA’s that they recruited. And don’t be surprised when the ivies follow the Stanford business model and cut the certain sports that promote white/wealthy participation.

You state:

“The schools mentioned above provide athletic $ to SA’s.”

Really, the school provides “athletic $” to the student athlete? No, they do not.

Do you think the school is paying money therefore they are “invested” in the athletes?

How do you think this works? Do you be believe that the team or the athletic department actually gives the student athlete $$$? Does the SA then pay the tuition, room and board with that “athletic money”?

Oh brother....

Are you serious??? That might be the most uninformed statement here. Have you heard of athletic scholarship. Please try to be somewhat informed. Appears maybe your SA has not received athletic scholarship. How about some simple math. Tuition/room/board/additionals-subtract merit(if qualify)+athletic scholarship or financial = out of pocket $ to attend. Your uninformed misleading statement that athletic Dept gives $ to SA is juvenile and dense

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Most Ivy's have been supporting over 30 varsity sports for a long time. Schools like Texas, Alabama, University of Miami only offer about 16 varsity teams. Notre Dame and Northwestern offer 19 or 20 varsity sports. Ivy's have a very long and rich athletic tradition and in fact have supported more athletes than just about all schools. They absolutely invest in their student athletes.

Sooo ....please enlighten us all as to why the ivies are so quick to cancel their sports seasons if they are supporting the student athletes that they recruited.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Most Ivy's have been supporting over 30 varsity sports for a long time. Schools like Texas, Alabama, University of Miami only offer about 16 varsity teams. Notre Dame and Northwestern offer 19 or 20 varsity sports. Ivy's have a very long and rich athletic tradition and in fact have supported more athletes than just about all schools. They absolutely invest in their student athletes.

Sooo ....please enlighten us all as to why the ivies are so quick to cancel their sports seasons if they are supporting the student athletes that they recruited.

because the ivies are run by a bunch of liberal/socialist academia's who believe the entire country should be shut down and will listen Biden like he is God!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Most Ivy's have been supporting over 30 varsity sports for a long time. Schools like Texas, Alabama, University of Miami only offer about 16 varsity teams. Notre Dame and Northwestern offer 19 or 20 varsity sports. Ivy's have a very long and rich athletic tradition and in fact have supported more athletes than just about all schools. They absolutely invest in their student athletes.

Sooo ....please enlighten us all as to why the ivies are so quick to cancel their sports seasons if they are supporting the student athletes that they recruited.

COVID

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Most Ivy's have been supporting over 30 varsity sports for a long time. Schools like Texas, Alabama, University of Miami only offer about 16 varsity teams. Notre Dame and Northwestern offer 19 or 20 varsity sports. Ivy's have a very long and rich athletic tradition and in fact have supported more athletes than just about all schools. They absolutely invest in their student athletes.

Sooo ....please enlighten us all as to why the ivies are so quick to cancel their sports seasons if they are supporting the student athletes that they recruited.

because the ivies are run by a bunch of liberal/socialist academia's who believe the entire country should be shut down and will listen Biden like he is God!

And all the other schools are run by such beacons of conservatism.... give it a rest. Just about every school is run by liberals. The only reason you even think of the Ivy’s is because they are the universities that “The Media” points to when they make a decision. Just like when John’s Hopkins Medical is cited.... the choose to cite “recognized” entities. Harvard and John’s Hopkins are world renowned. Not so much for many other schools.

[/quote]

Please explain how they support???? Ivies could have 100 varsity sports because The ivy student athletes PAY to play. The schools mentioned above provide athletic $ to SA’s. This goes to the discussion earlier in thread that the ivies will cancel their season in a nano second. That is where there is no support for SA’s that they recruited. And don’t be surprised when the ivies follow the Stanford business model and cut the certain sports that promote white/wealthy participation.[/quote]

You state:

“The schools mentioned above provide athletic $ to SA’s.”

Really, the school provides “athletic $” to the student athlete? No, they do not.

Do you think the school is paying money therefore they are “invested” in the athletes?

How do you think this works? Do you be believe that the team or the athletic department actually gives the student athlete $$$? Does the SA then pay the tuition, room and board with that “athletic money”?

Oh brother....[/quote]

Are you serious??? That might be the most uninformed statement here. Have you heard of athletic scholarship. Please try to be somewhat informed. Appears maybe your SA has not received athletic scholarship. How about some simple math. Tuition/room/board/additionals-subtract merit(if qualify)+athletic scholarship or financial = out of pocket $ to attend. Your uninformed misleading statement that athletic Dept gives $ to SA is juvenile and dense[/quote]

I believe the poster was being facetious or sarcastic.

This nonsense began when some Joker tried to make the point that Ivy league schools do not "invest" in their athletes / athletic programs. His / her point was that because the Ivy's do not offer athletic scholarships the schools do not care about their athletic programs. The point is ridiculous.

All this talk about Stanford, lacrosse is right up there with golf as a sport dominated by white & wealthy athletes.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

All this talk about Stanford, lacrosse is right up there with golf as a sport dominated by white & wealthy athletes.

What's your point? Nobody's denying it... but is it ok for Stanford or any school to use that specific criteria as a reason to cut it? ( and then lie and say it was financial reasons)

Originally Posted by Anonymous

All this talk about Stanford, lacrosse is right up there with golf as a sport dominated by white & wealthy athletes.

What's your point? Nobody's denying it... but is it ok for Stanford or any school to use that specific criteria as a reason to cut it? ( and then lie and say it was financial reasons)

The point is, with all these calls for racial justice, lacrosse may become extinct at many schools. Not sure how you interpreted the statement to bring a question regarding it. Just a statement.

information coming soon

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/arti...eet-thursday-discuss-spring-sports/57011

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Most Ivy's have been supporting over 30 varsity sports for a long time. Schools like Texas, Alabama, University of Miami only offer about 16 varsity teams. Notre Dame and Northwestern offer 19 or 20 varsity sports. Ivy's have a very long and rich athletic tradition and in fact have supported more athletes than just about all schools. They absolutely invest in their student athletes.

Sooo ....please enlighten us all as to why the ivies are so quick to cancel their sports seasons if they are supporting the student athletes that they recruited.

COVID

Covid. Are you kidding. 99.96% survival. Most don’t have symptoms. US has 330 million people and 10 mil test positive and we shut down. Anyway, this has been argued already. Just found that reason too funny

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.

just amplifying this statement;-

"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"

Most Ivy's have been supporting over 30 varsity sports for a long time. Schools like Texas, Alabama, University of Miami only offer about 16 varsity teams. Notre Dame and Northwestern offer 19 or 20 varsity sports. Ivy's have a very long and rich athletic tradition and in fact have supported more athletes than just about all schools. They absolutely invest in their student athletes.

Sooo ....please enlighten us all as to why the ivies are so quick to cancel their sports seasons if they are supporting the student athletes that they recruited.

Did I miss something? Didn't every school cancel their Spring and winter seasons last year? I guess none of those schools support there student athletes.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

information coming soon

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/arti...eet-thursday-discuss-spring-sports/57011

looks like Ivy's will cancel winter sports and as of now delay the start of spring sports. The assertion that it is because Ivy League schools are not "invested" in their Student Athletes is simply ignorant.

[/quote]

Provide data that supports your contention that more athletes at ivies receive financial support that is greater than the NCAA allotment.[/quote]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No data. However personal experience and the experience of family and friends. Ivy's have extremely aggressive financial aid. Especiallyfor families with multiple children attending college they can make it very affordable. Financial aid is not limited the way athletic scholarships are to "12" to be spit as the coach sees fit. There are other schools with excellent "Need Based" aid as well: Northwestern, Duke, Notre Dame, Georgetown etc... I know of Student Athletes who have given up their "Athletic Scholarship" due to the fact that they received more "need based" aid. In my daughters class more than half are receiving financial aid and it is not subject to or restricted by NCAA limits. Every Ivy and every class is different... but if you think that Yale, Penn, Princeton, Cornell and Brown (on the boys side) can do what they do with 100% of the kids being "pay to play" athletes or if Penn, Princeton and Dartmouth can be as competitive as they have been with all "Pay to Play" athletes (on the girls side) you are kidding yours.

Imagine if they could offer scholarship...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[/quote]

Provide data that supports your contention that more athletes at ivies receive financial support that is greater than the NCAA allotment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No data. However personal experience and the experience of family and friends. Ivy's have extremely aggressive financial aid. Especiallyfor families with multiple children attending college they can make it very affordable. Financial aid is not limited the way athletic scholarships are to "12" to be spit as the coach sees fit. There are other schools with excellent "Need Based" aid as well: Northwestern, Duke, Notre Dame, Georgetown etc... I know of Student Athletes who have given up their "Athletic Scholarship" due to the fact that they received more "need based" aid. In my daughters class more than half are receiving financial aid and it is not subject to or restricted by NCAA limits. Every Ivy and every class is different... but if you think that Yale, Penn, Princeton, Cornell and Brown (on the boys side) can do what they do with 100% of the kids being "pay to play" athletes or if Penn, Princeton and Dartmouth can be as competitive as they have been with all "Pay to Play" athletes (on the girls side) you are kidding yours.

Imagine if they could offer scholarship...[/quote]

My daughter receives 40k in aid to an Ivy. Was recruited to play lacrosse (we have an income of $250k). Was a better deal than most other schools were offering. Anyone who gets recruited to an Ivy and turns it down for a similar athletic scholarship (with the exception of Stanford, Duke, Hopkins) a is a fool!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Provide data that supports your contention that more athletes at ivies receive financial support that is greater than the NCAA allotment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No data. However personal experience and the experience of family and friends. Ivy's have extremely aggressive financial aid. Especiallyfor families with multiple children attending college they can make it very affordable. Financial aid is not limited the way athletic scholarships are to "12" to be spit as the coach sees fit. There are other schools with excellent "Need Based" aid as well: Northwestern, Duke, Notre Dame, Georgetown etc... I know of Student Athletes who have given up their "Athletic Scholarship" due to the fact that they received more "need based" aid. In my daughters class more than half are receiving financial aid and it is not subject to or restricted by NCAA limits. Every Ivy and every class is different... but if you think that Yale, Penn, Princeton, Cornell and Brown (on the boys side) can do what they do with 100% of the kids being "pay to play" athletes or if Penn, Princeton and Dartmouth can be as competitive as they have been with all "Pay to Play" athletes (on the girls side) you are kidding yours.

Imagine if they could offer scholarship...[/quote]

My daughter receives 40k in aid to an Ivy. Was recruited to play lacrosse (we have an income of $250k). Was a better deal than most other schools were offering. Anyone who gets recruited to an Ivy and turns it down for a similar athletic scholarship (with the exception of Stanford, Duke, Hopkins) a is a fool![/quote]

This has to be some fake post , there is no way anyone with half a brain would actually post this.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Provide data that supports your contention that more athletes at ivies receive financial support that is greater than the NCAA allotment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No data. However personal experience and the experience of family and friends. Ivy's have extremely aggressive financial aid. Especiallyfor families with multiple children attending college they can make it very affordable. Financial aid is not limited the way athletic scholarships are to "12" to be spit as the coach sees fit. There are other schools with excellent "Need Based" aid as well: Northwestern, Duke, Notre Dame, Georgetown etc... I know of Student Athletes who have given up their "Athletic Scholarship" due to the fact that they received more "need based" aid. In my daughters class more than half are receiving financial aid and it is not subject to or restricted by NCAA limits. Every Ivy and every class is different... but if you think that Yale, Penn, Princeton, Cornell and Brown (on the boys side) can do what they do with 100% of the kids being "pay to play" athletes or if Penn, Princeton and Dartmouth can be as competitive as they have been with all "Pay to Play" athletes (on the girls side) you are kidding yours.

Imagine if they could offer scholarship...

My daughter receives 40k in aid to an Ivy. Was recruited to play lacrosse (we have an income of $250k). Was a better deal than most other schools were offering. Anyone who gets recruited to an Ivy and turns it down for a similar athletic scholarship (with the exception of Stanford, Duke, Hopkins) a is a fool![/quote]

This has to be some fake post , there is no way anyone with half a brain would actually post this.[/quote]

Why would you say that? I did not write the Post but I see nothing wrong with it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Provide data that supports your contention that more athletes at ivies receive financial support that is greater than the NCAA allotment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No data. However personal experience and the experience of family and friends. Ivy's have extremely aggressive financial aid. Especiallyfor families with multiple children attending college they can make it very affordable. Financial aid is not limited the way athletic scholarships are to "12" to be spit as the coach sees fit. There are other schools with excellent "Need Based" aid as well: Northwestern, Duke, Notre Dame, Georgetown etc... I know of Student Athletes who have given up their "Athletic Scholarship" due to the fact that they received more "need based" aid. In my daughters class more than half are receiving financial aid and it is not subject to or restricted by NCAA limits. Every Ivy and every class is different... but if you think that Yale, Penn, Princeton, Cornell and Brown (on the boys side) can do what they do with 100% of the kids being "pay to play" athletes or if Penn, Princeton and Dartmouth can be as competitive as they have been with all "Pay to Play" athletes (on the girls side) you are kidding yours.

Imagine if they could offer scholarship...

My daughter receives 40k in aid to an Ivy. Was recruited to play lacrosse (we have an income of $250k). Was a better deal than most other schools were offering. Anyone who gets recruited to an Ivy and turns it down for a similar athletic scholarship (with the exception of Stanford, Duke, Hopkins) a is a fool!

This has to be some fake post , there is no way anyone with half a brain would actually post this.[/quote]

Why would you say that? I did not write the Post but I see nothing wrong with it.[/quote]

Saying anyone who has a chance to go to an Ivy and does not is a fool is arrogant and ignorant. It's the exact reason why some choose not to go so they don't have to be around the spoiled little brats of these types of self-important losers. There are many excellent schools and depending on the area of interest there are many schools that exceed the Ivy league schools for that area of interest. There are many legitimate reasons for kids to select the schools they do.Possibly a young girl wants to chase their dreams and attend a school who has a legit chance at winning a national championship while studying to get a degree and attend an Ivy graduate program, is she a fool. Its the reason many dislike the Ivies as many are insufferably boring.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Provide data that supports your contention that more athletes at ivies receive financial support that is greater than the NCAA allotment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No data. However personal experience and the experience of family and friends. Ivy's have extremely aggressive financial aid. Especiallyfor families with multiple children attending college they can make it very affordable. Financial aid is not limited the way athletic scholarships are to "12" to be spit as the coach sees fit. There are other schools with excellent "Need Based" aid as well: Northwestern, Duke, Notre Dame, Georgetown etc... I know of Student Athletes who have given up their "Athletic Scholarship" due to the fact that they received more "need based" aid. In my daughters class more than half are receiving financial aid and it is not subject to or restricted by NCAA limits. Every Ivy and every class is different... but if you think that Yale, Penn, Princeton, Cornell and Brown (on the boys side) can do what they do with 100% of the kids being "pay to play" athletes or if Penn, Princeton and Dartmouth can be as competitive as they have been with all "Pay to Play" athletes (on the girls side) you are kidding yours.

Imagine if they could offer scholarship...[/quote]

My daughter receives 40k in aid to an Ivy. Was recruited to play lacrosse (we have an income of $250k). Was a better deal than most other schools were offering. Anyone who gets recruited to an Ivy and turns it down for a similar athletic scholarship (with the exception of Stanford, Duke, Hopkins) a is a fool![/quote]

Sorry. Don’t believe that. Fake post.

Saying anyone who has a chance to go to an Ivy and does not is a fool is arrogant and ignorant. It's the exact reason why some choose not to go so they don't have to be around the spoiled little brats of these types of self-important losers. There are many excellent schools and depending on the area of interest there are many schools that exceed the Ivy league schools for that area of interest. There are many legitimate reasons for kids to select the schools they do.Possibly a young girl wants to chase their dreams and attend a school who has a legit chance at winning a national championship while studying to get a degree and attend an Ivy graduate program, is she a fool. Its the reason many dislike the Ivies as many are insufferably boring.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow! Angry, bitter and uniformed all in one post.

Your comment: "Possibly a young girl wants to chase their dreams and attend a school who has a legit chance at winning a national championship". Tells us all who the "Arrogant" one is.

Your comment: "spoiled little brats" tells us all who the lost is.

Your comment: "self important losers" tells us all just who is "insufferably boring".

You comment: about "attending an Ivy graduate program" tells us all that you are either a hypocrite or you are full of S#!%.

Some day when you are not telling your daughter to Go To Goal maybe you can tell us all what type of track record your daughters program has at placing players in Ivy League Graduate Programs as that would be useful information to the readers on this site.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Saying anyone who has a chance to go to an Ivy and does not is a fool is arrogant and ignorant. It's the exact reason why some choose not to go so they don't have to be around the spoiled little brats of these types of self-important losers. There are many excellent schools and depending on the area of interest there are many schools that exceed the Ivy league schools for that area of interest. There are many legitimate reasons for kids to select the schools they do.Possibly a young girl wants to chase their dreams and attend a school who has a legit chance at winning a national championship while studying to get a degree and attend an Ivy graduate program, is she a fool. Its the reason many dislike the Ivies as
many are insufferably boring.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow! Angry, bitter and uniformed all in one post.

Your comment: "Possibly a young girl wants to chase their dreams and attend a school who has a legit chance at winning a national championship". Tells us all who the "Arrogant" one is.

Your comment: "spoiled little brats" tells us all who the lost is.

Your comment: "self important losers" tells us all just who is "insufferably boring".

You comment: about "attending an Ivy graduate program" tells us all that you are either a hypocrite or you are full of S#!%.

Some day when you are not telling your daughter to Go To Goal maybe you can tell us all what type of track record your daughters program has at placing players in Ivy League Graduate Programs as that would be useful information to the readers on this site.

Ironically because of my Ivy League education I knew you would not see the irony in my post.
That said when you call young women fools because they did not elect to take the path your little brat took it tells us all we need to know about you .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Saying anyone who has a chance to go to an Ivy and does not is a fool is arrogant and ignorant. It's the exact reason why some choose not to go so they don't have to be around the spoiled little brats of these types of self-important losers. There are many excellent schools and depending on the area of interest there are many schools that exceed the Ivy league schools for that area of interest. There are many legitimate reasons for kids to select the schools they do.Possibly a young girl wants to chase their dreams and attend a school who has a legit chance at winning a national championship while studying to get a degree and attend an Ivy graduate program, is she a fool. Its the reason many dislike the Ivies as
many are insufferably boring.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow! Angry, bitter and uniformed all in one post.

Your comment: "Possibly a young girl wants to chase their dreams and attend a school who has a legit chance at winning a national championship". Tells us all who the "Arrogant" one is.

Your comment: "spoiled little brats" tells us all who the lost is.

Your comment: "self important losers" tells us all just who is "insufferably boring".

You comment: about "attending an Ivy graduate program" tells us all that you are either a hypocrite or you are full of S#!%.

Some day when you are not telling your daughter to Go To Goal maybe you can tell us all what type of track record your daughters program has at placing players in Ivy League Graduate Programs as that would be useful information to the readers on this site.

Ironically because of my Ivy League education I knew you would not see the irony in my post.
That said when you call young women fools because they did not elect to take the path your little brat took it tells us all we need to know about you .

Ha good one. More like your no name 2 year community college education. Although the Biden/Harris sticker on your Prius looks nice as it’s helps you pose as an ivy snob. Now be quiet and put your mask on.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Saying anyone who has a chance to go to an Ivy and does not is a fool is arrogant and ignorant. It's the exact reason why some choose not to go so they don't have to be around the spoiled little brats of these types of self-important losers. There are many excellent schools and depending on the area of interest there are many schools that exceed the Ivy league schools for that area of interest. There are many legitimate reasons for kids to select the schools they do.Possibly a young girl wants to chase their dreams and attend a school who has a legit chance at winning a national championship while studying to get a degree and attend an Ivy graduate program, is she a fool. Its the reason many dislike the Ivies as
many are insufferably boring.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow! Angry, bitter and uniformed all in one post.

Your comment: "Possibly a young girl wants to chase their dreams and attend a school who has a legit chance at winning a national championship". Tells us all who the "Arrogant" one is.

Your comment: "spoiled little brats" tells us all who the lost is.

Your comment: "self important losers" tells us all just who is "insufferably boring".

You comment: about "attending an Ivy graduate program" tells us all that you are either a hypocrite or you are full of S#!%.

Some day when you are not telling your daughter to Go To Goal maybe you can tell us all what type of track record your daughters program has at placing players in Ivy League Graduate Programs as that would be useful information to the readers on this site.

Ironically because of my Ivy League education I knew you would not see the irony in my post.
That said when you call young women fools because they did not elect to take the path your little brat took it tells us all we need to know about you .

Ha good one. More like your no name 2 year community college education. Although the Biden/Harris sticker on your Prius looks nice as it’s helps you pose as an ivy snob. Now be quiet and put your mask on.

Now that's funny. 😃

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Provide data that supports your contention that more athletes at ivies receive financial support that is greater than the NCAA allotment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No data. However personal experience and the experience of family and friends. Ivy's have extremely aggressive financial aid. Especiallyfor families with multiple children attending college they can make it very affordable. Financial aid is not limited the way athletic scholarships are to "12" to be spit as the coach sees fit. There are other schools with excellent "Need Based" aid as well: Northwestern, Duke, Notre Dame, Georgetown etc... I know of Student Athletes who have given up their "Athletic Scholarship" due to the fact that they received more "need based" aid. In my daughters class more than half are receiving financial aid and it is not subject to or restricted by NCAA limits. Every Ivy and every class is different... but if you think that Yale, Penn, Princeton, Cornell and Brown (on the boys side) can do what they do with 100% of the kids being "pay to play" athletes or if Penn, Princeton and Dartmouth can be as competitive as they have been with all "Pay to Play" athletes (on the girls side) you are kidding yours.

Imagine if they could offer scholarship...

My daughter receives 40k in aid to an Ivy. Was recruited to play lacrosse (we have an income of $250k). Was a better deal than most other schools were offering. Anyone who gets recruited to an Ivy and turns it down for a similar athletic scholarship (with the exception of Stanford, Duke, Hopkins) a is a fool![/quote]

Sorry. Don’t believe that. Fake post.[/quote]

The post about ivy cost is 100% correct. Almost exactly the same as ours. Believe it or not but it may get even better... they are also trying to match her up with a donor for an additional 10k. So much for your theory. Can you say ivy education and perks for state school price. I can!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Provide data that supports your contention that more athletes at ivies receive financial support that is greater than the NCAA allotment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No data. However personal experience and the experience of family and friends. Ivy's have extremely aggressive financial aid. Especiallyfor families with multiple children attending college they can make it very affordable. Financial aid is not limited the way athletic scholarships are to "12" to be spit as the coach sees fit. There are other schools with excellent "Need Based" aid as well: Northwestern, Duke, Notre Dame, Georgetown etc... I know of Student Athletes who have given up their "Athletic Scholarship" due to the fact that they received more "need based" aid. In my daughters class more than half are receiving financial aid and it is not subject to or restricted by NCAA limits. Every Ivy and every class is different... but if you think that Yale, Penn, Princeton, Cornell and Brown (on the boys side) can do what they do with 100% of the kids being "pay to play" athletes or if Penn, Princeton and Dartmouth can be as competitive as they have been with all "Pay to Play" athletes (on the girls side) you are kidding yours.

Imagine if they could offer scholarship...

My daughter receives 40k in aid to an Ivy. Was recruited to play lacrosse (we have an income of $250k). Was a better deal than most other schools were offering. Anyone who gets recruited to an Ivy and turns it down for a similar athletic scholarship (with the exception of Stanford, Duke, Hopkins) a is a fool!

Sorry. Don’t believe that. Fake post.[/quote]

The post about ivy cost is 100% correct. Almost exactly the same as ours. Believe it or not but it may get even better... they are also trying to match her up with a donor for an additional 10k. So much for your theory. Can you say ivy education and perks for state school price. I can!![/quote]

Ha. So now we are up to $50k aid on a $250k income. Sure. That’s legit. Perks??! Uhhh. Getting your sports seasons cancelled.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Provide data that supports your contention that more athletes at ivies receive financial support that is greater than the NCAA allotment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No data. However personal experience and the experience of family and friends. Ivy's have extremely aggressive financial aid. Especiallyfor families with multiple children attending college they can make it very affordable. Financial aid is not limited the way athletic scholarships are to "12" to be spit as the coach sees fit. There are other schools with excellent "Need Based" aid as well: Northwestern, Duke, Notre Dame, Georgetown etc... I know of Student Athletes who have given up their "Athletic Scholarship" due to the fact that they received more "need based" aid. In my daughters class more than half are receiving financial aid and it is not subject to or restricted by NCAA limits. Every Ivy and every class is different... but if you think that Yale, Penn, Princeton, Cornell and Brown (on the boys side) can do what they do with 100% of the kids being "pay to play" athletes or if Penn, Princeton and Dartmouth can be as competitive as they have been with all "Pay to Play" athletes (on the girls side) you are kidding yours.

Imagine if they could offer scholarship...

My daughter receives 40k in aid to an Ivy. Was recruited to play lacrosse (we have an income of $250k). Was a better deal than most other schools were offering. Anyone who gets recruited to an Ivy and turns it down for a similar athletic scholarship (with the exception of Stanford, Duke, Hopkins) a is a fool!

Sorry. Don’t believe that. Fake post.[/quote]

The post about ivy cost is 100% correct. Almost exactly the same as ours. Believe it or not but it may get even better... they are also trying to match her up with a donor for an additional 10k. So much for your theory. Can you say ivy education and perks for state school price. I can!![/quote]

The average cost to attend after Aid, Acceptance Rate, Graduation Rate.... They appear to give a ton of $$$ they are obviously very competitive academically and they have extremely high graduation rates.

Princeton: Average cost after Aid = $9,749 - Acceptance 5% - Graduation Rate 98%

Harvard: Average cost after Aid = $15,561 - Acceptance 5% - Graduation Rate 97%

Yale: Average cost after Aid = $18,770 - Acceptance 6% - Graduation Rate 96%

Columbia: Average cost after Aid = $22,637 - Acceptance - 6% Graduation Rate 95%

Penn: Average cost after Aid = $25,033 - Acceptance 8% - Graduation Rate 95%

Cornell: Average cost after Aid = $30,494 - Acceptance 11% - Graduation Rate 94%

Dartmouth: Average cost after Aid = $31,449 - Acceptance 9% - Graduation Rate 96%

Brown: Average cost after Aid = $31,685 - Acceptance 8% - Graduation Rate 96%

If a student athlete has the grades and is recruited by an Ivy they are certainly worth considering...

Excellent education, competitive athletics and apparently somewhat affordable.

Will there be a 2021 season? What will it look like? Will there be out of conference games? Will there be overnight travel? Will there be a post season?

There are 10 programs that have been ranked in the Top 20 in the final poll in each of the past 5 seasons (excluding 2020) 2015 - 2019. (Probably the same programs going back 10 years)...

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Penn
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida

What programs are on the rise and ready to consistently be ranked among the best year in and year out?

Norte Dame, JMU and Penn State have finished in the Top 20 in four of the past 5 years. Obviously JMU won a National Championship and PSU went to two final fours in that time period.

Will we see more parity in the future? What programs will challenge each and every year?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There are 10 programs that have been ranked in the Top 20 in the final poll in each of the past 5 seasons (excluding 2020) 2015 - 2019. (Probably the same programs going back 10 years)...

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Penn
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida

What programs are on the rise and ready to consistently be ranked among the best year in and year out?

Norte Dame, JMU and Penn State have finished in the Top 20 in four of the past 5 years. Obviously JMU won a National Championship and PSU went to two final fours in that time period.

Will we see more parity in the future? What programs will challenge each and every year?

Loyola has a very good program, Richmond has been on the rise and some of the programs out west have had some very competitive teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There are 10 programs that have been ranked in the Top 20 in the final poll in each of the past 5 seasons (excluding 2020) 2015 - 2019. (Probably the same programs going back 10 years)...

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Penn
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida

What programs are on the rise and ready to consistently be ranked among the best year in and year out?

Norte Dame, JMU and Penn State have finished in the Top 20 in four of the past 5 years. Obviously JMU won a National Championship and PSU went to two final fours in that time period.

Will we see more parity in the future? What programs will challenge each and every year?

Loyola has a very good program, Richmond has been on the rise and some of the programs out west have had some very competitive teams.

What the Navy Coach has been able to accomplish is very impressive. Not sure that Navy will be able to be a Top 10 - 20 Program every year but what they have done is amazing. Dartmouth has impressed me in recent years, Michigan has everything they need to break into that group and I believe that Duke will work there way back into the top tier.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There are 10 programs that have been ranked in the Top 20 in the final poll in each of the past 5 seasons (excluding 2020) 2015 - 2019. (Probably the same programs going back 10 years)...

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton

Penn
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida

What programs are on the rise and ready to consistently be ranked among the best year in and year out?

Norte Dame, JMU and Penn State have finished in the Top 20 in four of the past 5 years. Obviously JMU won a National Championship and PSU went to two final fours in that time period.

Will we see more parity in the future? What programs will challenge each and every year?

Loyola has a very good program, Richmond has been on the rise and some of the programs out west have had some very competitive teams.

What the Navy Coach has been able to accomplish is very impressive. Not sure that Navy will be able to be a Top 10 - 20 Program every year but what they have done is amazing. Dartmouth has impressed me in recent years, Michigan has everything they need to break into that group and I believe that Duke will work there way back into the top tier.

What has Navy accomplished other than an occasional upset win ? Dartmouth had a very good coach who left . Duke will be below average in the ACC for the foreseeable future . Michigan has a chance .

The NCAA announced well in advance of Fall and Winter season start that players would get another year. Why aren’t they doing the same for Spring sports? It is becoming pretty obvious BEST case it will only be a conference schedule with up tick of virus. This will at least give the kids a chance to make an educated decision on if they will get another year. If not, , do they opt out of this year knowing it will be hit or miss, so don’t use the year of eligibility.

NCAA needs to make a call one way or the other to give clarity.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There are 10 programs that have been ranked in the Top 20 in the final poll in each of the past 5 seasons (excluding 2020) 2015 - 2019. (Probably the same programs going back 10 years)...

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton

Penn
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida

What programs are on the rise and ready to consistently be ranked among the best year in and year out?

Norte Dame, JMU and Penn State have finished in the Top 20 in four of the past 5 years. Obviously JMU won a National Championship and PSU went to two final fours in that time period.

Will we see more parity in the future? What programs will challenge each and every year?

Loyola has a very good program, Richmond has been on the rise and some of the programs out west have had some very competitive teams.

What the Navy Coach has been able to accomplish is very impressive. Not sure that Navy will be able to be a Top 10 - 20 Program every year but what they have done is amazing. Dartmouth has impressed me in recent years, Michigan has everything they need to break into that group and I believe that Duke will work there way back into the top tier.

What has Navy accomplished other than an occasional upset win ? Dartmouth had a very good coach who left . Duke will be below average in the ACC for the foreseeable future . Michigan has a chance .

Navy made it to the Final Four (the first DI Final Four for any women’s team from a service academy) Navy was a relatively new program in 2017 when the did it, they went to the final 8 in 2018. There are a lot of programs that have been around a lot longer who have not accomplished as much.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The NCAA announced well in advance of Fall and Winter season start that players would get another year. Why aren’t they doing the same for Spring sports? It is becoming pretty obvious BEST case it will only be a conference schedule with up tick of virus. This will at least give the kids a chance to make an educated decision on if they will get another year. If not, , do they opt out of this year knowing it will be hit or miss, so don’t use the year of eligibility.

NCAA needs to make a call one way or the other to give clarity.

The NCAA will most likely hold to the 5 to play 4 rule. It is very unlikely that they will continue to grant additional years of eligibility. Students athletes who were enrolled last spring were granted an additional year so if they op out of school this year (the year) it still counts as one of the five years. It the player was a freshman last year and they opt out this year they will have 3 years of eligibility left.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There are 10 programs that have been ranked in the Top 20 in the final poll in each of the past 5 seasons (excluding 2020) 2015 - 2019. (Probably the same programs going back 10 years)...

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton

Penn
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida

What programs are on the rise and ready to consistently be ranked among the best year in and year out?

Norte Dame, JMU and Penn State have finished in the Top 20 in four of the past 5 years. Obviously JMU won a National Championship and PSU went to two final fours in that time period.

Will we see more parity in the future? What programs will challenge each and every year?

Loyola has a very good program, Richmond has been on the rise and some of the programs out west have had some very competitive teams.

What the Navy Coach has been able to accomplish is very impressive. Not sure that Navy will be able to be a Top 10 - 20 Program every year but what they have done is amazing. Dartmouth has impressed me in recent years, Michigan has everything they need to break into that group and I believe that Duke will work there way back into the top tier.

What has Navy accomplished other than an occasional upset win ? Dartmouth had a very good coach who left . Duke will be below average in the ACC for the foreseeable future . Michigan has a chance .

Navy made it to the Final Four (the first DI Final Four for any women’s team from a service academy) Navy was a relatively new program in 2017 when the did it, they went to the final 8 in 2018. There are a lot of programs that have been around a lot longer who have not accomplished as much.

Yes, Navy has done a fantastic job. Dartmouth should compete with Princeton and Penn for The Top spot in the Ivy. No reason Duke can't get back to where they were, with the exception of the past few years they were constantly a Top 20 if not Top 10 Program. Lets see if Michigan can continue to build, they are in a very good position to do so.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There are 10 programs that have been ranked in the Top 20 in the final poll in each of the past 5 seasons (excluding 2020) 2015 - 2019. (Probably the same programs going back 10 years)...

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Penn
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida

What programs are on the rise and ready to consistently be ranked among the best year in and year out?

Norte Dame, JMU and Penn State have finished in the Top 20 in four of the past 5 years. Obviously JMU won a National Championship and PSU went to two final fours in that time period.

Will we see more parity in the future? What programs will challenge each and every year?

I just looked at Inside Lacrosse Top 50 incoming freshmen rankings / list... it looks like 38 of the 50 or 76% are at the 13 schools listed above. The formula seems to be... the top programs bring in the majority of the top players and they remain the top programs year after year...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There are 10 programs that have been ranked in the Top 20 in the final poll in each of the past 5 seasons (excluding 2020) 2015 - 2019. (Probably the same programs going back 10 years)...

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Penn
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida

What programs are on the rise and ready to consistently be ranked among the best year in and year out?

Norte Dame, JMU and Penn State have finished in the Top 20 in four of the past 5 years. Obviously JMU won a National Championship and PSU went to two final fours in that time period.

Will we see more parity in the future? What programs will challenge each and every year?

I just looked at Inside Lacrosse Top 50 incoming freshmen rankings / list... it looks like 38 of the 50 or 76% are at the 13 schools listed above. The formula seems to be... the top programs bring in the majority of the top players and they remain the top programs year after year...

Or the ranking were done after the girls committed and it's just a self-fulfilling prophecy...

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There are 10 programs that have been ranked in the Top 20 in the final poll in each of the past 5 seasons (excluding 2020) 2015 - 2019. (Probably the same programs going back 10 years)...

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Penn
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida

What programs are on the rise and ready to consistently be ranked among the best year in and year out?

Norte Dame, JMU and Penn State have finished in the Top 20 in four of the past 5 years. Obviously JMU won a National Championship and PSU went to two final fours in that time period.

Will we see more parity in the future? What programs will challenge each and every year?

I just looked at Inside Lacrosse Top 50 incoming freshmen rankings / list... it looks like 38 of the 50 or 76% are at the 13 schools listed above. The formula seems to be... the top programs bring in the majority of the top players and they remain the top programs year after year...

Or the ranking were done after the girls committed and it's just a self-fulfilling prophecy...

Which came first? The chicken or the egg?

The reality is that those programs consistently bring in the best talent that is why they are consistently considered among the best programs. Coaching will only get a team so far, need to have talent as well. The talent pool has expanded but not by much, the programs listed (especially MD, UNC) still bring in the majority of the best players.

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There are 10 programs that have been ranked in the Top 20 in the final poll in each of the past 5 seasons (excluding 2020) 2015 - 2019. (Probably the same programs going back 10 years)...

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Penn
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida

What programs are on the rise and ready to consistently be ranked among the best year in and year out?

Norte Dame, JMU and Penn State have finished in the Top 20 in four of the past 5 years. Obviously JMU won a National Championship and PSU went to two final fours in that time period.

Will we see more parity in the future? What programs will challenge each and every year?

I just looked at Inside Lacrosse Top 50 incoming freshmen rankings / list... it looks like 38 of the 50 or 76% are at the 13 schools listed above. The formula seems to be... the top programs bring in the majority of the top players and they remain the top programs year after year...

Or the ranking were done after the girls committed and it's just a self-fulfilling prophecy...

Or, people who understand the game tend to identify many of the same players as being in the top tier.

So sat watching many replays of final fours this weekend. Can someone tell me why the IWCLA has not recommended replay in college women’s lacrosse? There are some very easy calls that are just missed. In goal circle and one I couldn’t believe on a stick check in a semi game. Also after watching the games from years past why is it the same refs every year on final four games. I am sure they must grade out as best.

I know the game is hard to see everything for refs so we should help them.All other non revenue sports have replay in college.

Just wondering if someone knew the reason.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So sat watching many replays of final fours this weekend. Can someone tell me why the IWCLA has not recommended replay in college women’s lacrosse? There are some very easy calls that are just missed. In goal circle and one I couldn’t believe on a stick check in a semi game. Also after watching the games from years past why is it the same refs every year on final four games. I am sure they must grade out as best.

I know the game is hard to see everything for refs so we should help them.All other non revenue sports have replay in college.

Just wondering if someone knew the reason.

Seriously? take a second and think of all the things you need to do to provide the refs on the field with instant replay in a timely fashion. you cant just do the final four games this would need to be part of every team, every game all season long..

Yeah seriously. Put it in D1 first. Almost ever game is streamed. Again replay is in every other NCAA sport that is a NON REVENUE-Baseball, softball, volleyball, soccer, field hockey, so why not lacrosse. It makes no sense not to have it.

If they can’t see off the streamed version then don’t over turn it. But put it in the game so when it matters they have it. There was a blatant crease call in one game for example.

There are things that refs don’t see based on angles etc..not fault of theirs. So like other sports it would be a nice aid
To get it right. There has to be a reason that they don’t have this, but pass every other meaningless things.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Yeah seriously. Put it in D1 first. Almost ever game is streamed. Again replay is in every other NCAA sport that is a NON REVENUE-Baseball, softball, volleyball, soccer, field hockey, so why not lacrosse. It makes no sense not to have it.

If they can’t see off the streamed version then don’t over turn it. But put it in the game so when it matters they have it. There was a blatant crease call in one game for example.

There are things that refs don’t see based on angles etc..not fault of theirs. So like other sports it would be a nice aid
To get it right. There has to be a reason that they don’t have this, but pass every other meaningless things.

I call BS on other sports having instant reply all ready in place.. there is no way that someone is working the instant reply machine in Womens Field Hockey.

I get your point it would be great if they could do it, but there is not the budget, the availability of technology, equipment or referees to make it happen.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Yeah seriously. Put it in D1 first. Almost ever game is streamed. Again replay is in every other NCAA sport that is a NON REVENUE-Baseball, softball, volleyball, soccer, field hockey, so why not lacrosse. It makes no sense not to have it.

If they can’t see off the streamed version then don’t over turn it. But put it in the game so when it matters they have it. There was a blatant crease call in one game for example.

There are things that refs don’t see based on angles etc..not fault of theirs. So like other sports it would be a nice aid
To get it right. There has to be a reason that they don’t have this, but pass every other meaningless things.

I call BS on other sports having instant reply all ready in place.. there is no way that someone is working the instant reply machine in Womens Field Hockey.

I get your point it would be great if they could do it, but there is not the budget, the availability of technology, equipment or referees to make it happen.

College field hockey actually has something called a video referral. The players can call for a review if they disagree with a call.

You can BS if you want. But first do you research. There is review in NCAA field hockey, softball, baseball, volleyball.

Watch the BIG Ten or ACC network for these sports. Why do you think i was asking the question-this is where I saw it.

So the technology is there for games. And most importantly it will be there for playoffs where it is needed most.

I think there may be a bigger reason the IWCLA is not asking for this to be added as other sports already have it in place.

In case you need assurance that there are very few people in this world that care about lacrosse breakdancing just got in the Olympics in 2024. A sport filled with very average athletes with even fewer that could play another sport. If it wasn’t for title9 women’s lacrosse wouldn’t exist!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

In case you need assurance that there are very few people in this world that care about lacrosse breakdancing just got in the Olympics in 2024. A sport filled with very average athletes with even fewer that could play another sport. If it wasn’t for title9 women’s lacrosse wouldn’t exist!

Completely idiotic statement spoken by someone who undoubtedly has zero idea which end of their body speaks and which end poops.

Yeah, breakdancers sure are a one-sport crowd yay IOC!

Ha

Originally Posted by Anonymous

In case you need assurance that there are very few people in this world that care about lacrosse breakdancing just got in the Olympics in 2024. A sport filled with very average athletes with even fewer that could play another sport. If it wasn’t for title9 women’s lacrosse wouldn’t exist!

Thanks for the insight, very helpful.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

In case you need assurance that there are very few people in this world that care about lacrosse breakdancing just got in the Olympics in 2024. A sport filled with very average athletes with even fewer that could play another sport. If it wasn’t for title9 women’s lacrosse wouldn’t exist!

What kind of women hating failure does someone have to be to come onto a site about women's lacrosse to spew such animonsity. Sorry your son's squash team got cut but hating young women will not get his team back.

The problem with womens lacrosse is us parents are probably the most motivated and close knot of any sport parents. Then add in a very robust and very costly club travel circuit that we all started at a young age with everything geared towards playing in college. Problem is in college only about 20 teams are relevant with most of our kids playing at average to way below average schools where no one cares except us the parents. In the end, no one cares about the sport except us. If you can comes to grips with that you will enjoy the ride

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The problem with womens lacrosse is us parents are probably the most motivated and close knot of any sport parents. Then add in a very robust and very costly club travel circuit that we all started at a young age with everything geared towards playing in college. Problem is in college only about 20 teams are relevant with most of our kids playing at average to way below average schools where no one cares except us the parents. In the end, no one cares about the sport except us. If you can comes to grips with that you will enjoy the ride

Its the same in almost every other team sport a handful of teams are relevant just about every year and a few teams jump up for a short run. That said playing on any college team can be a great experience and well worth it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The problem with womens lacrosse is us parents are probably the most motivated and close knot of any sport parents. Then add in a very robust and very costly club travel circuit that we all started at a young age with everything geared towards playing in college. Problem is in college only about 20 teams are relevant with most of our kids playing at average to way below average schools where no one cares except us the parents. In the end, no one cares about the sport except us. If you can comes to grips with that you will enjoy the ride

Its the same in almost every other team sport a handful of teams are relevant just about every year and a few teams jump up for a short run. That said playing on any college team can be a great experience and well worth it.

No other sport falls off like womens lacrosse

Originally Posted by Anonymous

In case you need assurance that there are very few people in this world that care about lacrosse breakdancing just got in the Olympics in 2024. A sport filled with very average athletes with even fewer that could play another sport. If it wasn’t for title9 women’s lacrosse wouldn’t exist!

Says the one who most likely never competed at any level. Congratulations to any athlete who has an opportunity to compete in college. Obviously the person who person who authored the above knows very little about what it means to be an athlete or to be part of a team. Go back under your rock.

What a ridiculous statement! You don't have to play for a top 20 program for the experience to be relevant. The majority of girls won't play for a top 20 and most parents recognize that. There are many great academic schools that will never see the top 20 but still offer their athletes a terrific education and academic support during the process. Oh and that being a part of a team thing is pretty great and rewarding too!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What a ridiculous statement! You don't have to play for a top 20 program for the experience to be relevant. The majority of girls won't play for a top 20 and most parents recognize that. There are many great academic schools that will never see the top 20 but still offer their athletes a terrific education and academic support during the process. Oh and that being a part of a team thing is pretty great and rewarding too!

I believe they meant relevant in terms of competing for a national championship, which is true. That said I would bet that many players on lower ranked teams enjoy their experience equally if not more than the super competitive environment of many of these top teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What a ridiculous statement! You don't have to play for a top 20 program for the experience to be relevant. The majority of girls won't play for a top 20 and most parents recognize that. There are many great academic schools that will never see the top 20 but still offer their athletes a terrific education and academic support during the process. Oh and that being a part of a team thing is pretty great and rewarding too!

I believe they meant relevant in terms of competing for a national championship, which is true. That said I would bet that many players on lower ranked teams enjoy their experience equally if not more than the super competitive environment of many of these top teams.

I meant nobody cares or watches except us parents. It was in response to the sport still not being in the Olympics. When you look at all the ridiculous sports that are in the Olympics you can see how low women's lax ranks

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The problem with womens lacrosse is us parents are probably the most motivated and close knot of any sport parents. Then add in a very robust and very costly club travel circuit that we all started at a young age with everything geared towards playing in college. Problem is in college only about 20 teams are relevant with most of our kids playing at average to way below average schools where no one cares except us the parents. In the end, no one cares about the sport except us. If you can comes to grips with that you will enjoy the ride

Its the same in almost every other team sport a handful of teams are relevant just about every year and a few teams jump up for a short run. That said playing on any college team can be a great experience and well worth it.

No other sport falls off like womens lacrosse

Really? Get a clue.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The problem with womens lacrosse is us parents are probably the most motivated and close knot of any sport parents. Then add in a very robust and very costly club travel circuit that we all started at a young age with everything geared towards playing in college. Problem is in college only about 20 teams are relevant with most of our kids playing at average to way below average schools where no one cares except us the parents. In the end, no one cares about the sport except us. If you can comes to grips with that you will enjoy the ride

Its the same in almost every other team sport a handful of teams are relevant just about every year and a few teams jump up for a short run. That said playing on any college team can be a great experience and well worth it.

No other sport falls off like womens lacrosse

Women’s lacrosse falls off?
ESPN, 10,000 fans at sold out Homewood, amazing student athletes, role models for young women.
Women’s lacrosse is awesome!
Take a look at the last NCAA Semifinals.

https://youtu.be/xoaXANRIX-E

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The problem with womens lacrosse is us parents are probably the most motivated and close knot of any sport parents. Then add in a very robust and very costly club travel circuit that we all started at a young age with everything geared towards playing in college. Problem is in college only about 20 teams are relevant with most of our kids playing at average to way below average schools where no one cares except us the parents. In the end, no one cares about the sport except us. If you can comes to grips with that you will enjoy the ride

Have to digress on the close-knit parents. The minute we started any upper level club or travel, other team parents keep their guard up and view you with suspition until you pass the muster. soccer lacrosse and basketball
And, sorry, but Im not sending my girl to just any program to play. She wants to enjoy college, study abroad (haha one day) take classes that interest her and further her education and career prospects upon graduation. I told her - "just be your best right now - it doesnt matter about college (shes a 23) just be your best right now". IG's with 5-6 am workout calls scare her. sorry but thats just the way she is. Probably not some programs cup of tea but she is going to enjoy it right now.

Best ncaa playoff game ever!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

In case you need assurance that there are very few people in this world that care about lacrosse breakdancing just got in the Olympics in 2024. A sport filled with very average athletes with even fewer that could play another sport. If it wasn’t for title9 women’s lacrosse wouldn’t exist!

Sour grapes.... Go away. You sound like the same type who poo poo's accolades when your daughter is overlooked.

It looks like it is about that time the NCAA grants the Spring 2021 sports another year. Based on vaccine rollout plan there is no way it will be close to normal season. With the Ivies most likely not playing at all in Spring with all the opt outs already, and Big Ten announcing they are most likely in conference only. Many conferences will have no choice but to follow.

As the NCAA did with Fall(which had a full fall with conference championships and looks to have National championships in Spring season) and Winter sports for all years it is time they step up and do it for Spring 2021 years.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It looks like it is about that time the NCAA grants the Spring 2021 sports another year. Based on vaccine rollout plan there is no way it will be close to normal season. With the Ivies most likely not playing at all in Spring with all the opt outs already, and Big Ten announcing they are most likely in conference only. Many conferences will have no choice but to follow.

As the NCAA did with Fall(which had a full fall with conference championships and looks to have National championships in Spring season) and Winter sports for all years it is time they step up and do it for Spring 2021 years.

NCAA should put out 1 word........PLAY. Find ways to play....not excuses NOT to play. This whole thing has been absurd!!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It looks like it is about that time the NCAA grants the Spring 2021 sports another year. Based on vaccine rollout plan there is no way it will be close to normal season. With the Ivies most likely not playing at all in Spring with all the opt outs already, and Big Ten announcing they are most likely in conference only. Many conferences will have no choice but to follow.

As the NCAA did with Fall(which had a full fall with conference championships and looks to have National championships in Spring season) and Winter sports for all years it is time they step up and do it for Spring 2021 years.

The NCAA will not (can not) keep giving an additional year.... Athletes will most likely be granted just one additional year but the NCAA will most likely hold to the "5" to play "4" rule.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It looks like it is about that time the NCAA grants the Spring 2021 sports another year. Based on vaccine rollout plan there is no way it will be close to normal season. With the Ivies most likely not playing at all in Spring with all the opt outs already, and Big Ten announcing they are most likely in conference only. Many conferences will have no choice but to follow.

As the NCAA did with Fall(which had a full fall with conference championships and looks to have National championships in Spring season) and Winter sports for all years it is time they step up and do it for Spring 2021 years.

The NCAA will not (can not) keep giving an additional year.... Athletes will most likely be granted just one additional year but the NCAA will most likely hold to the "5" to play "4" rule.

I could be wrong but I know of a soccer player who redshirted her junior year due to injury and is a 5th year senior this year .She has said she will be coming back next fall as she is eligible according to this years NCAA ruling giving her 6 years .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It looks like it is about that time the NCAA grants the Spring 2021 sports another year. Based on vaccine rollout plan there is no way it will be close to normal season. With the Ivies most likely not playing at all in Spring with all the opt outs already, and Big Ten announcing they are most likely in conference only. Many conferences will have no choice but to follow.

As the NCAA did with Fall(which had a full fall with conference championships and looks to have National championships in Spring season) and Winter sports for all years it is time they step up and do it for Spring 2021 years.

The NCAA will not (can not) keep giving an additional year.... Athletes will most likely be granted just one additional year but the NCAA will most likely hold to the "5" to play "4" rule.

I could be wrong but I know of a soccer player who redshirted her junior year due to injury and is a 5th year senior this year .She has said she will be coming back next fall as she is eligible according to this years NCAA ruling giving her 6 years .

I think you are right but that was an exception. Do you think the NCAA would be willing to make that exception for every player? Trust me, I am on the players side and hope that they do, but I just don't know if it is realistic.

Time for NCAA to announce another year of eligibility for Spring sports. They have no choice to do it as did for Fall and Winter sports. If they are not going to do it you could see many opt outs for season up coming. If your coming back for 5th season I don’t think it is for a conference championship .

I don’t see why the NCAA does not push the lax season back a month . The NCAA baseball tourney goes way into the summer . With the vaccines being put out and a natural drop off in viral levels I could see a normal Championship happening July 4th as opposed to Memorial Day weekend . That way they don’t have to grant an extra year to anyone and can get back to normal faster .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I don’t see why the NCAA does not push the lax season back a month . The NCAA baseball tourney goes way into the summer . With the vaccines being put out and a natural drop off in viral levels I could see a normal Championship happening July 4th as opposed to Memorial Day weekend . That way they don’t have to grant an extra year to anyone and can get back to normal faster .

I completely agree, been saying this for some months now, though I don’t think it’s even being discussed. Too bad!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I don’t see why the NCAA does not push the lax season back a month . The NCAA baseball tourney goes way into the summer . With the vaccines being put out and a natural drop off in viral levels I could see a normal Championship happening July 4th as opposed to Memorial Day weekend . That way they don’t have to grant an extra year to anyone and can get back to normal faster .

I completely agree, been saying this for some months now, though I don’t think it’s even being discussed. Too bad!

Very unlikely.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I don’t see why the NCAA does not push the lax season back a month . The NCAA baseball tourney goes way into the summer . With the vaccines being put out and a natural drop off in viral levels I could see a normal Championship happening July 4th as opposed to Memorial Day weekend . That way they don’t have to grant an extra year to anyone and can get back to normal faster .

I completely agree, been saying this for some months now, though I don’t think it’s even being discussed. Too bad!

Have to think covid situation will be better if lax season is delayed a couple of months, but vaccine administration is moving too slowly right now and a meaningful percentage of folks are declining to be vaccinated. Too many moving parts. Infection and exposure will still be an issue this spring even with a vaccine - there is potential for missed practices, games, travel limitations (due to both covid and budgets), etc. I would love a delay if it means a normal season for my daughter, but...being honest...I don't think lacrosse will be viewed as a sport worth jumping through logistical hoops to change plans already in place.

I don't see how the NCAA doesn't grant spring sports a waiver soon since the season the season is about to begin for many teams. I suppose they could limit to only one additional year of eligibility specifically due to covid, though.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I don’t see why the NCAA does not push the lax season back a month . The NCAA baseball tourney goes way into the summer . With the vaccines being put out and a natural drop off in viral levels I could see a normal Championship happening July 4th as opposed to Memorial Day weekend . That way they don’t have to grant an extra year to anyone and can get back to normal faster .

I completely agree, been saying this for some months now, though I don’t think it’s even being discussed. Too bad!

Have to think covid situation will be better if lax season is delayed a couple of months, but vaccine administration is moving too slowly right now and a meaningful percentage of folks are declining to be vaccinated. Too many moving parts. Infection and exposure will still be an issue this spring even with a vaccine - there is potential for missed practices, games, travel limitations (due to both covid and budgets), etc. I would love a delay if it means a normal season for my daughter, but...being honest...I don't think lacrosse will be viewed as a sport worth jumping through logistical hoops to change plans already in place.

I don't see how the NCAA doesn't grant spring sports a waiver soon since the season the season is about to begin for many teams. I suppose they could limit to only one additional year of eligibility specifically due to covid, though.

Once again waffling about virus that is 99.8 overcome by students at the college age. NCAA should be finding ways TO PLAY not excuses on why not to play.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I don’t see why the NCAA does not push the lax season back a month . The NCAA baseball tourney goes way into the summer . With the vaccines being put out and a natural drop off in viral levels I could see a normal Championship happening July 4th as opposed to Memorial Day weekend . That way they don’t have to grant an extra year to anyone and can get back to normal faster .

I completely agree, been saying this for some months now, though I don’t think it’s even being discussed. Too bad!

Have to think covid situation will be better if lax season is delayed a couple of months, but vaccine administration is moving too slowly right now and a meaningful percentage of folks are declining to be vaccinated. Too many moving parts. Infection and exposure will still be an issue this spring even with a vaccine - there is potential for missed practices, games, travel limitations (due to both covid and budgets), etc. I would love a delay if it means a normal season for my daughter, but...being honest...I don't think lacrosse will be viewed as a sport worth jumping through logistical hoops to change plans already in place.

I don't see how the NCAA doesn't grant spring sports a waiver soon since the season the season is about to begin for many teams. I suppose they could limit to only one additional year of eligibility specifically due to covid, though.

Once again waffling about virus that is 99.8 overcome by students at the college age. NCAA should be finding ways TO PLAY not excuses on why not to play.

Explain to me how you personally arrived at 99.8%. Bottom line is, I highly doubt schools will spend the same amount of resources on a non-revenue sport as they have on football and basketball. Yes, non-revenue. I know many of you detest to hear that but it's the truth.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I don’t see why the NCAA does not push the lax season back a month . The NCAA baseball tourney goes way into the summer . With the vaccines being put out and a natural drop off in viral levels I could see a normal Championship happening July 4th as opposed to Memorial Day weekend . That way they don’t have to grant an extra year to anyone and can get back to normal faster .

I completely agree, been saying this for some months now, though I don’t think it’s even being discussed. Too bad!

Have to think covid situation will be better if lax season is delayed a couple of months, but vaccine administration is moving too slowly right now and a meaningful percentage of folks are declining to be vaccinated. Too many moving parts. Infection and exposure will still be an issue this spring even with a vaccine - there is potential for missed practices, games, travel limitations (due to both covid and budgets), etc. I would love a delay if it means a normal season for my daughter, but...being honest...I don't think lacrosse will be viewed as a sport worth jumping through logistical hoops to change plans already in place.

I don't see how the NCAA doesn't grant spring sports a waiver soon since the season the season is about to begin for many teams. I suppose they could limit to only one additional year of eligibility specifically due to covid, though.

Once again waffling about virus that is 99.8 overcome by students at the college age. NCAA should be finding ways TO PLAY not excuses on why not to play.

Explain to me how you personally arrived at 99.8%. Bottom line is, I highly doubt schools will spend the same amount of resources on a non-revenue sport as they have on football and basketball. Yes, non-revenue. I know many of you detest to hear that but it's the truth.

First off I have never heard anyone respond to the term non revenue sport aggressively as it’s a fact . That said the NCAAwill need to be very careful about spending so many resources on those revenue sports while not trying with the others as we live in a litigious society .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I don’t see why the NCAA does not push the lax season back a month . The NCAA baseball tourney goes way into the summer . With the vaccines being put out and a natural drop off in viral levels I could see a normal Championship happening July 4th as opposed to Memorial Day weekend . That way they don’t have to grant an extra year to anyone and can get back to normal faster .

I completely agree, been saying this for some months now, though I don’t think it’s even being discussed. Too bad!

Have to think covid situation will be better if lax season is delayed a couple of months, but vaccine administration is moving too slowly right now and a meaningful percentage of folks are declining to be vaccinated. Too many moving parts. Infection and exposure will still be an issue this spring even with a vaccine - there is potential for missed practices, games, travel limitations (due to both covid and budgets), etc. I would love a delay if it means a normal season for my daughter, but...being honest...I don't think lacrosse will be viewed as a sport worth jumping through logistical hoops to change plans already in place.

I don't see how the NCAA doesn't grant spring sports a waiver soon since the season the season is about to begin for many teams. I suppose they could limit to only one additional year of eligibility specifically due to covid, though.

Once again waffling about virus that is 99.8 overcome by students at the college age. NCAA should be finding ways TO PLAY not excuses on why not to play.

Explain to me how you personally arrived at 99.8%. Bottom line is, I highly doubt schools will spend the same amount of resources on a non-revenue sport as they have on football and basketball. Yes, non-revenue. I know many of you detest to hear that but it's the truth.

Huh. Women’s and men’s cross country, field hockey, volleyball, water polo and men’s/women’s soccer all competed. Last I looked they are non- revenue. Your doubt means your opinion. At least get some facts to support your opinion.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I don’t see why the NCAA does not push the lax season back a month . The NCAA baseball tourney goes way into the summer . With the vaccines being put out and a natural drop off in viral levels I could see a normal Championship happening July 4th as opposed to Memorial Day weekend . That way they don’t have to grant an extra year to anyone and can get back to normal faster .

I completely agree, been saying this for some months now, though I don’t think it’s even being discussed. Too bad!

Have to think covid situation will be better if lax season is delayed a couple of months, but vaccine administration is moving too slowly right now and a meaningful percentage of folks are declining to be vaccinated. Too many moving parts. Infection and exposure will still be an issue this spring even with a vaccine - there is potential for missed practices, games, travel limitations (due to both covid and budgets), etc. I would love a delay if it means a normal season for my daughter, but...being honest...I don't think lacrosse will be viewed as a sport worth jumping through logistical hoops to change plans already in place.

I don't see how the NCAA doesn't grant spring sports a waiver soon since the season the season is about to begin for many teams. I suppose they could limit to only one additional year of eligibility specifically due to covid, though.

Once again waffling about virus that is 99.8 overcome by students at the college age. NCAA should be finding ways TO PLAY not excuses on why not to play.

Explain to me how you personally arrived at 99.8%. Bottom line is, I highly doubt schools will spend the same amount of resources on a non-revenue sport as they have on football and basketball. Yes, non-revenue. I know many of you detest to hear that but it's the truth.

Explain to me how "Non-Revenue" sports were able compete this past Fall at many schools. The ACC, SEC, Big 12 etc... all had Fall 2020 fall seasons for their non-revenue sports.

Stop with this revenue sports talk. Only football brings in dollars and men’s basketball big programs as well

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stop with this revenue sports talk. Only football brings in dollars and men’s basketball big programs as well

I agree. But will add only a few football and basketball teams are in the black on their $ spread sheet.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I don’t see why the NCAA does not push the lax season back a month . The NCAA baseball tourney goes way into the summer . With the vaccines being put out and a natural drop off in viral levels I could see a normal Championship happening July 4th as opposed to Memorial Day weekend . That way they don’t have to grant an extra year to anyone and can get back to normal faster .

I completely agree, been saying this for some months now, though I don’t think it’s even being discussed. Too bad!

Have to think covid situation will be better if lax season is delayed a couple of months, but vaccine administration is moving too slowly right now and a meaningful percentage of folks are declining to be vaccinated. Too many moving parts. Infection and exposure will still be an issue this spring even with a vaccine - there is potential for missed practices, games, travel limitations (due to both covid and budgets), etc. I would love a delay if it means a normal season for my daughter, but...being honest...I don't think lacrosse will be viewed as a sport worth jumping through logistical hoops to change plans already in place.

I don't see how the NCAA doesn't grant spring sports a waiver soon since the season the season is about to begin for many teams. I suppose they could limit to only one additional year of eligibility specifically due to covid, though.

Why would the NCAA grant spring sport (2021) student athletes an additional year when it is the individual schools and or conferences that are making decisions? Many fall sports competed this past fall ... The NCAA did not stop them.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I don’t see why the NCAA does not push the lax season back a month . The NCAA baseball tourney goes way into the summer . With the vaccines being put out and a natural drop off in viral levels I could see a normal Championship happening July 4th as opposed to Memorial Day weekend . That way they don’t have to grant an extra year to anyone and can get back to normal faster .

I completely agree, been saying this for some months now, though I don’t think it’s even being discussed. Too bad!

Have to think covid situation will be better if lax season is delayed a couple of months, but vaccine administration is moving too slowly right now and a meaningful percentage of folks are declining to be vaccinated. Too many moving parts. Infection and exposure will still be an issue this spring even with a vaccine - there is potential for missed practices, games, travel limitations (due to both covid and budgets), etc. I would love a delay if it means a normal season for my daughter, but...being honest...I don't think lacrosse will be viewed as a sport worth jumping through logistical hoops to change plans already in place.

I don't see how the NCAA doesn't grant spring sports a waiver soon since the season the season is about to begin for many teams. I suppose they could limit to only one additional year of eligibility specifically due to covid, though.

Why would the NCAA grant spring sport (2021) student athletes an additional year when it is the individual schools and or conferences that are making decisions? Many fall sports competed this past fall ... The NCAA did not stop them.

That’s the point . The NCAA granted all fall and winter athletes an extra year even if they essentially played an almost normal season .

Preseason Top 20

1. North Carolina
2. Notre Dame
3. Loyola
4. Syracuse
5. Stony Brook
6. Northwestern
7. Florida
8. Maryland
9. Michigan
10. Richmond
11. Penn
12. Denver
13. James Madison
14. USC
15. Duke
16. Dartmouth
17. Boston College
18. Virginia
19. UMass
20. Virginia Tech

Also considered (alphabetical order): Colorado, Hofstra, Navy, Penn State, Stanford

Although these polls really do not matter until May they are fun to discuss.

- North Carolina obvious choice for #1...
- ND ?? Too high...
- Loyola is always tough but not sure they are Final Four caliber...
- Syracuse could certainly be Final Four Team...
- Stony Brook is loaded and could finally make a run in the tournament...
- Northwestern will be in the mix at the end...
- Florida will be very good but don't think Final four, #7 about right...
- Maryland... Never count them out...
- Michigan ?? Not sure they will be Top 10 at the end...
- Richmond, Very solid probably finish 10 - 15...
- Penn at 11 might be a bit high for the Quakers this year...
- Denver a little high...
- JMU about right...
- Could finish Top 15...
- Duke? Will they finish in the Top 20? Been a while...
- Dartmouth has been very tough in recent years but Ivy's at a disadvantage this year...
- BC is probably ranked a little low...
- Umass about right, They will finish in the Top 20

Hofstra and PSU will both be tough...

Any Team not listed that could surprise?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I don’t see why the NCAA does not push the lax season back a month . The NCAA baseball tourney goes way into the summer . With the vaccines being put out and a natural drop off in viral levels I could see a normal Championship happening July 4th as opposed to Memorial Day weekend . That way they don’t have to grant an extra year to anyone and can get back to normal faster .

I completely agree, been saying this for some months now, though I don’t think it’s even being discussed. Too bad!

Have to think covid situation will be better if lax season is delayed a couple of months, but vaccine administration is moving too slowly right now and a meaningful percentage of folks are declining to be vaccinated. Too many moving parts. Infection and exposure will still be an issue this spring even with a vaccine - there is potential for missed practices, games, travel limitations (due to both covid and budgets), etc. I would love a delay if it means a normal season for my daughter, but...being honest...I don't think lacrosse will be viewed as a sport worth jumping through logistical hoops to change plans already in place.

I don't see how the NCAA doesn't grant spring sports a waiver soon since the season the season is about to begin for many teams. I suppose they could limit to only one additional year of eligibility specifically due to covid, though.

Why would the NCAA grant spring sport (2021) student athletes an additional year when it is the individual schools and or conferences that are making decisions? Many fall sports competed this past fall ... The NCAA did not stop them.

Yes, many played but every fall and winter athlete was granted an extra year of eligibility. The wrinkle with spring athletes is that they have already been granted an additional year of eligibility after playing a partial season...except freshman who were in high school last year, obviously.

SB more loaded than when they had Ohlmiller sisters, great goalie and Murphy?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

SB more loaded than when they had Ohlmiller sisters, great goalie and Murphy?

Yes

Completely off topic of ranked teams and eligibility, but what is your take on the NCAA easing up on marijuana use/testing? With all of the current research surrounding it’s beneficial results pertaining to pain/stress management, perhaps it could be looked into a bit more.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Completely off topic of ranked teams and eligibility, but what is your take on the NCAA easing up on marijuana use/testing? With all of the current research surrounding it’s beneficial results pertaining to pain/stress management, perhaps it could be looked into a bit more.

Please state the factual clinical research studies and double blind experiments that have led you to your opinion. I have an idea. Have your daughter start smoking joints and let us know how that goes.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Completely off topic of ranked teams and eligibility, but what is your take on the NCAA easing up on marijuana use/testing? With all of the current research surrounding it’s beneficial results pertaining to pain/stress management, perhaps it could be looked into a bit more.

Not a good idea.

Patriot League has announced how they will handle spring sports, including women’s and men’s lacrosse.

https://www.uslaxmagazine.com/colle...formats-for-mens-womens-lacrosse-seasons

Originally Posted by baldbear

Patriot League has announced how they will handle spring sports, including women’s and men’s lacrosse.

https://www.uslaxmagazine.com/colle...formats-for-mens-womens-lacrosse-seasons

Great news! I'm hearing B1G 10 teams will all play each other 2x, and may have a couple out of conference games. ACC will play full schedule. This is very good

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

Patriot League has announced how they will handle spring sports, including women’s and men’s lacrosse.

https://www.uslaxmagazine.com/colle...formats-for-mens-womens-lacrosse-seasons

Great news! I'm hearing B1G 10 teams will all play each other 2x, and may have a couple out of conference games. ACC will play full schedule. This is very good

Ivies supposed to make an announcement the end of January. Makes it difficult for the kids who are waiting t enroll based on the season.

Inside Lacrosse Rankings

1. North Carolina

2. Notre Dame

3. Syracuse

4. Northwestern

5. Loyola

6. Stony Brook

7. Florida

8. Maryland

9. Michigan

10. James Madison

11. Duke

12. Richmond

13. Boston College

14. Virginia

15. Denver

16. Virginia Tech

17. Navy

18. Penn State

19. Stanford

20. USC

Stony Brook, Maryland and Virginia too low... :-)

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Inside Lacrosse Rankings

1. North Carolina

2. Notre Dame

3. Syracuse

4. Northwestern

5. Loyola

6. Stony Brook

7. Florida

8. Maryland

9. Michigan

10. James Madison

11. Duke

12. Richmond

13. Boston College

14. Virginia

15. Denver

16. Virginia Tech

17. Navy

18. Penn State

19. Stanford

20. USC

Stony Brook, Maryland and Virginia too low... :-)

The rankings look pretty good except I would drop Cuse to 6 and move 4-6 up one. That said anyone else sick of Spallina's endless hype machine.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Inside Lacrosse Rankings

1. North Carolina

2. Notre Dame

3. Syracuse

4. Northwestern

5. Loyola

6. Stony Brook

7. Florida

8. Maryland

9. Michigan

10. James Madison

11. Duke

12. Richmond

13. Boston College

14. Virginia

15. Denver

16. Virginia Tech

17. Navy

18. Penn State

19. Stanford

20. USC

Stony Brook, Maryland and Virginia too low... :-)

The rankings look pretty good except I would drop Cuse to 6 and move 4-6 up one. That said anyone else sick of Spallina's endless hype machine.

No fan of the hype machine but don’t think a #6 ranking is out of line, if anything they should be higher. Not sure ND belongs at 2. Virginia could be higher. Why Duke at 11?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Inside Lacrosse Rankings

1. North Carolina

2. Notre Dame

3. Syracuse

4. Northwestern

5. Loyola

6. Stony Brook

7. Florida

8. Maryland

9. Michigan

10. James Madison

11. Duke

12. Richmond

13. Boston College

14. Virginia

15. Denver

16. Virginia Tech

17. Navy

18. Penn State

19. Stanford

20. USC

Stony Brook, Maryland and Virginia too low... :-)

The rankings look pretty good except I would drop Cuse to 6 and move 4-6 up one. That said anyone else sick of Spallina's endless hype machine.

No fan of the hype machine but don’t think a #6 ranking is out of line, if anything they should be higher. Not sure ND belongs at 2. Virginia could be higher. Why Duke at 11?

IMHO we will see even less parity over the next few years. The strong will get stronger because they will be able to bring in transfers and 5th year players like never before. The top (college players) will flock to the best programs. This will also impact current high school players because college coaches will look to bring in more proven college players.

Can't see anyone outside the perennial Top 10 - 15 programs being able to break in, there just is not enough talent to go around. The best programs bring in the majority of the top players each and every year and now they will also be bringing in high end transfers not just the Under Armour All Americans. Transfer Portal + at least 3 classes of players with an extra year of eligibility will help the rich get richer.

Spallina while being an excellent coach is essentially a clown . Every year he sells the nonsense that his program is top 5 when they never are and worse he sells the story that he has the best player on the planet when he doesn’t . Even more annoying is the stunts he gets away with like having a player who had zero business being invited to to us team tryouts or touting a player as the best player in the country and one who should be what every young player aspired to be when in fact that player is one of the worse examples of sportsmanship and has been since high school . Sorry but character matters .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Spallina while being an excellent coach is essentially a clown . Every year he sells the nonsense that his program is top 5 when they never are and worse he sells the story that he has the best player on the planet when he doesn’t . Even more annoying is the stunts he gets away with like having a player who had zero business being invited to to us team tryouts or touting a player as the best player in the country and one who should be what every young player aspired to be when in fact that player is one of the worse examples of sportsmanship and has been since high school . Sorry but character matters .

You do know they don’t vote themselves top 5 correct and as much as I don’t agree with it all I wish my daughters coach fought for her players . Also not hard to tell who is still feeling the scars from their daughter being a flop at the collegiate level or perhaps “over hyped “ your daughter left HS over hyped but that was ok ? Get over frustration with your daughters under achieving and you’ll be ok
Subject change never thought I’d say this but can’t wait to travel south every weekend to watch my daughter play it’s been too long

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Preseason Top 20

1. North Carolina
2. Notre Dame
3. Loyola
4. Syracuse
5. Stony Brook
6. Northwestern
7. Florida
8. Maryland
9. Michigan
10. Richmond
11. Penn
12. Denver
13. James Madison
14. USC
15. Duke
16. Dartmouth
17. Boston College
18. Virginia
19. UMass
20. Virginia Tech

Also considered (alphabetical order): Colorado, Hofstra, Navy, Penn State, Stanford

Although these polls really do not matter until May they are fun to discuss.

- North Carolina obvious choice for #1...
- ND ?? Too high...
- Loyola is always tough but not sure they are Final Four caliber...
- Syracuse could certainly be Final Four Team...
- Stony Brook is loaded and could finally make a run in the tournament...
- Northwestern will be in the mix at the end...
- Florida will be very good but don't think Final four, #7 about right...
- Maryland... Never count them out...
- Michigan ?? Not sure they will be Top 10 at the end...
- Richmond, Very solid probably finish 10 - 15...
- Penn at 11 might be a bit high for the Quakers this year...
- Denver a little high...
- JMU about right...
- Could finish Top 15...
- Duke? Will they finish in the Top 20? Been a while...
- Dartmouth has been very tough in recent years but Ivy's at a disadvantage this year...
- BC is probably ranked a little low...
- Umass about right, They will finish in the Top 20

Hofstra and PSU will both be tough...

Any Team not listed that could surprise?

Pretty good list should be fun

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Preseason Top 20

1. North Carolina
2. Notre Dame
3. Loyola
4. Syracuse
5. Stony Brook
6. Northwestern
7. Florida
8. Maryland
9. Michigan
10. Richmond
11. Penn
12. Denver
13. James Madison
14. USC
15. Duke
16. Dartmouth
17. Boston College
18. Virginia
19. UMass
20. Virginia Tech

Also considered (alphabetical order): Colorado, Hofstra, Navy, Penn State, Stanford

Although these polls really do not matter until May they are fun to discuss.

- North Carolina obvious choice for #1...
- ND ?? Too high...
- Loyola is always tough but not sure they are Final Four caliber...
- Syracuse could certainly be Final Four Team...
- Stony Brook is loaded and could finally make a run in the tournament...
- Northwestern will be in the mix at the end...
- Florida will be very good but don't think Final four, #7 about right...
- Maryland... Never count them out...
- Michigan ?? Not sure they will be Top 10 at the end...
- Richmond, Very solid probably finish 10 - 15...
- Penn at 11 might be a bit high for the Quakers this year...
- Denver a little high...
- JMU about right...
- Could finish Top 15...
- Duke? Will they finish in the Top 20? Been a while...
- Dartmouth has been very tough in recent years but Ivy's at a disadvantage this year...
- BC is probably ranked a little low...
- Umass about right, They will finish in the Top 20

Hofstra and PSU will both be tough...

Any Team not listed that could surprise?

Pretty good list should be fun

After UNC and cuse and maybe a few others I think there is parity

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Preseason Top 20

1. North Carolina
2. Notre Dame
3. Loyola
4. Syracuse
5. Stony Brook
6. Northwestern
7. Florida
8. Maryland
9. Michigan
10. Richmond
11. Penn
12. Denver
13. James Madison
14. USC
15. Duke
16. Dartmouth
17. Boston College
18. Virginia
19. UMass
20. Virginia Tech

Also considered (alphabetical order): Colorado, Hofstra, Navy, Penn State, Stanford

Although these polls really do not matter until May they are fun to discuss.

- North Carolina obvious choice for #1...
- ND ?? Too high...
- Loyola is always tough but not sure they are Final Four caliber...
- Syracuse could certainly be Final Four Team...
- Stony Brook is loaded and could finally make a run in the tournament...
- Northwestern will be in the mix at the end...
- Florida will be very good but don't think Final four, #7 about right...
- Maryland... Never count them out...
- Michigan ?? Not sure they will be Top 10 at the end...
- Richmond, Very solid probably finish 10 - 15...
- Penn at 11 might be a bit high for the Quakers this year...
- Denver a little high...
- JMU about right...
- Could finish Top 15...
- Duke? Will they finish in the Top 20? Been a while...
- Dartmouth has been very tough in recent years but Ivy's at a disadvantage this year...
- BC is probably ranked a little low...
- Umass about right, They will finish in the Top 20

Hofstra and PSU will both be tough...

Any Team not listed that could surprise?

Pretty good list should be fun

After UNC and cuse and maybe a few others I think there is parity

Parity among the teams that are ranked between 5 -15, maybe between 5 - 20 annually. Teams outside of that group rarely compete with the top teams. The same 10 to 15 teams are there every year and then you have some that come and go. Although the sport continues to grow, it appears that the best players still end up at the best programs.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Preseason Top 20

1. North Carolina
2. Notre Dame
3. Loyola
4. Syracuse
5. Stony Brook
6. Northwestern
7. Florida
8. Maryland
9. Michigan
10. Richmond
11. Penn
12. Denver
13. James Madison
14. USC
15. Duke
16. Dartmouth
17. Boston College
18. Virginia
19. UMass
20. Virginia Tech

Also considered (alphabetical order): Colorado, Hofstra, Navy, Penn State, Stanford

Although these polls really do not matter until May they are fun to discuss.

- North Carolina obvious choice for #1...
- ND ?? Too high...
- Loyola is always tough but not sure they are Final Four caliber...
- Syracuse could certainly be Final Four Team...
- Stony Brook is loaded and could finally make a run in the tournament...
- Northwestern will be in the mix at the end...
- Florida will be very good but don't think Final four, #7 about right...
- Maryland... Never count them out...
- Michigan ?? Not sure they will be Top 10 at the end...
- Richmond, Very solid probably finish 10 - 15...
- Penn at 11 might be a bit high for the Quakers this year...
- Denver a little high...
- JMU about right...
- Could finish Top 15...
- Duke? Will they finish in the Top 20? Been a while...
- Dartmouth has been very tough in recent years but Ivy's at a disadvantage this year...
- BC is probably ranked a little low...
- Umass about right, They will finish in the Top 20

Hofstra and PSU will both be tough...

Any Team not listed that could surprise?

Pretty good list should be fun

After UNC and cuse and maybe a few others I think there is parity

Parity among the teams that are ranked between 5 -15, maybe between 5 - 20 annually. Teams outside of that group rarely compete with the top teams. The same 10 to 15 teams are there every year and then you have some that come and go. Although the sport continues to grow, it appears that the best players still end up at the best programs.

After UNC will be fun to watch Loyola cues SB NW FLorida MD shake out

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Spallina while being an excellent coach is essentially a clown . Every year he sells the nonsense that his program is top 5 when they never are and worse he sells the story that he has the best player on the planet when he doesn’t . Even more annoying is the stunts he gets away with like having a player who had zero business being invited to to us team tryouts or touting a player as the best player in the country and one who should be what every young player aspired to be when in fact that player is one of the worse examples of sportsmanship and has been since high school . Sorry but character matters .

You do know they don’t vote themselves top 5 correct and as much as I don’t agree with it all I wish my daughters coach fought for her players . Also not hard to tell who is still feeling the scars from their daughter being a flop at the collegiate level or perhaps “over hyped “ your daughter left HS over hyped but that was ok ? Get over frustration with your daughters under achieving and you’ll be ok
Subject change never thought I’d say this but can’t wait to travel south every weekend to watch my daughter play it’s been too long

First off thanks for the info on them not voting themselves top 5 captain obvious, that's why it says he "sells the nonsense" and the Inside Lacrosse staff buys into it. I can guarantee you my daughter was a more highly regarded player than your kid will ever be but your ignorant attempt to change the subject will not work. Yes I have a problem when his hype machine causes a more deserving player to miss out on something like a tryout for the US team or when he promotes a player who is a terrible teammate and shows poor sportsmanship on the field ,something he actively promotes.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Preseason Top 20

1. North Carolina
2. Notre Dame
3. Loyola
4. Syracuse
5. Stony Brook
6. Northwestern
7. Florida
8. Maryland
9. Michigan
10. Richmond
11. Penn
12. Denver
13. James Madison
14. USC
15. Duke
16. Dartmouth
17. Boston College
18. Virginia
19. UMass
20. Virginia Tech

Also considered (alphabetical order): Colorado, Hofstra, Navy, Penn State, Stanford

Although these polls really do not matter until May they are fun to discuss.

- North Carolina obvious choice for #1...
- ND ?? Too high...
- Loyola is always tough but not sure they are Final Four caliber...
- Syracuse could certainly be Final Four Team...
- Stony Brook is loaded and could finally make a run in the tournament...
- Northwestern will be in the mix at the end...
- Florida will be very good but don't think Final four, #7 about right...
- Maryland... Never count them out...
- Michigan ?? Not sure they will be Top 10 at the end...
- Richmond, Very solid probably finish 10 - 15...
- Penn at 11 might be a bit high for the Quakers this year...
- Denver a little high...
- JMU about right...
- Could finish Top 15...
- Duke? Will they finish in the Top 20? Been a while...
- Dartmouth has been very tough in recent years but Ivy's at a disadvantage this year...
- BC is probably ranked a little low...
- Umass about right, They will finish in the Top 20

Hofstra and PSU will both be tough...

Any Team not listed that could surprise?

Pretty good list should be fun

After UNC and cuse and maybe a few others I think there is parity

Parity among the teams that are ranked between 5 -15, maybe between 5 - 20 annually. Teams outside of that group rarely compete with the top teams. The same 10 to 15 teams are there every year and then you have some that come and go. Although the sport continues to grow, it appears that the best players still end up at the best programs.

After UNC will be fun to watch Loyola cues SB NW FLorida MD shake out

Northwestern will be very good

I do agree lots of talented players at UNC. But I think one big issue that will play a major role is loss of assistant coach KD. They had a very close game with NW, and were just going to tough part of schedule when season cancelled LY. Time will tell and what team put the work in during break will show in the big games.

Should be a fun season. Let’s hope it happens with few delays.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I do agree lots of talented players at UNC. But I think one big issue that will play a major role is loss of assistant coach KD. They had a very close game with NW, and were just going to tough part of schedule when season cancelled LY. Time will tell and what team put the work in during break will show in the big games.

Should be a fun season. Let’s hope it happens with few delays.

I agree 100 % ,I don’t believe UNC has ever won a national championship with KD not running the offense . I would say they are still the most talented team in the country as they essentially bring their whole team back and will be better in the midfield ( which was their weak spot last year) with the addition of Miller and the return of Hillman but coaching matters . Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND . Look out for Loyola as they are one of those teams that are well coached and tend to fly under the radar . Which of the top teams will get a lift from their freshman .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I do agree lots of talented players at UNC. But I think one big issue that will play a major role is loss of assistant coach KD. They had a very close game with NW, and were just going to tough part of schedule when season cancelled LY. Time will tell and what team put the work in during break will show in the big games.

Should be a fun season. Let’s hope it happens with few delays.

I agree 100 % ,I don’t believe UNC has ever won a national championship with KD not running the offense . I would say they are still the most talented team in the country as they essentially bring their whole team back and will be better in the midfield ( which was their weak spot last year) with the addition of Miller and the return of Hillman but coaching matters . Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND . Look out for Loyola as they are one of those teams that are well coached and tend to fly under the radar . Which of the top teams will get a lift from their freshman .

Why would you state: "Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND"? UNC's record vs Notre Dame is 8 - 1 and although UNC's record vs Northwestern is 11 - 11 UNC has won 9 of the last 10 games vs Northwestern. Not a lot of struggling going on vs ND and NU...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I do agree lots of talented players at UNC. But I think one big issue that will play a major role is loss of assistant coach KD. They had a very close game with NW, and were just going to tough part of schedule when season cancelled LY. Time will tell and what team put the work in during break will show in the big games.

Should be a fun season. Let’s hope it happens with few delays.

I agree 100 % ,I don’t believe UNC has ever won a national championship with KD not running the offense . I would say they are still the most talented team in the country as they essentially bring their whole team back and will be better in the midfield ( which was their weak spot last year) with the addition of Miller and the return of Hillman but coaching matters . Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND . Look out for Loyola as they are one of those teams that are well coached and tend to fly under the radar . Which of the top teams will get a lift from their freshman .

Why would you state: "Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND"? UNC's record vs Notre Dame is 8 - 1 and although UNC's record vs Northwestern is 11 - 11 UNC has won 9 of the last 10 games vs Northwestern. Not a lot of struggling going on vs ND and NU...

To compare UNC to ND this year, actually any year is laughable. ND and Michigan are the two most overrated teams in women’s lacrosse!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I do agree lots of talented players at UNC. But I think one big issue that will play a major role is loss of assistant coach KD. They had a very close game with NW, and were just going to tough part of schedule when season cancelled LY. Time will tell and what team put the work in during break will show in the big games.

Should be a fun season. Let’s hope it happens with few delays.

I agree 100 % ,I don’t believe UNC has ever won a national championship with KD not running the offense . I would say they are still the most talented team in the country as they essentially bring their whole team back and will be better in the midfield ( which was their weak spot last year) with the addition of Miller and the return of Hillman but coaching matters . Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND . Look out for Loyola as they are one of those teams that are well coached and tend to fly under the radar . Which of the top teams will get a lift from their freshman .

Why would you state: "Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND"? UNC's record vs Notre Dame is 8 - 1 and although UNC's record vs Northwestern is 11 - 11 UNC has won 9 of the last 10 games vs Northwestern. Not a lot of struggling going on vs ND and NU...

To compare UNC to ND this year, actually any year is laughable. ND and Michigan are the two most overrated teams in women’s lacrosse!!

Why bring Michigan into this? Michigan had a very good year in 2019... maybe they will become a perennial Top 20 program. Notre Dame is a very good program but I would agree that they most years ND is overrated at the beginning of the season.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I do agree lots of talented players at UNC. But I think one big issue that will play a major role is loss of assistant coach KD. They had a very close game with NW, and were just going to tough part of schedule when season cancelled LY. Time will tell and what team put the work in during break will show in the big games.

Should be a fun season. Let’s hope it happens with few delays.

I agree 100 % ,I don’t believe UNC has ever won a national championship with KD not running the offense . I would say they are still the most talented team in the country as they essentially bring their whole team back and will be better in the midfield ( which was their weak spot last year) with the addition of Miller and the return of Hillman but coaching matters . Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND . Look out for Loyola as they are one of those teams that are well coached and tend to fly under the radar . Which of the top teams will get a lift from their freshman .

Why would you state: "Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND"? UNC's record vs Notre Dame is 8 - 1 and although UNC's record vs Northwestern is 11 - 11 UNC has won 9 of the last 10 games vs Northwestern. Not a lot of struggling going on vs ND and NU...

Is it your assertion that if you win it isn’t a struggle?

And you are giving overall records, not just the away records.... if you just want to argue, you have made your point.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I do agree lots of talented players at UNC. But I think one big issue that will play a major role is loss of assistant coach KD. They had a very close game with NW, and were just going to tough part of schedule when season cancelled LY. Time will tell and what team put the work in during break will show in the big games.

Should be a fun season. Let’s hope it happens with few delays.

I agree 100 % ,I don’t believe UNC has ever won a national championship with KD not running the offense . I would say they are still the most talented team in the country as they essentially bring their whole team back and will be better in the midfield ( which was their weak spot last year) with the addition of Miller and the return of Hillman but coaching matters . Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND . Look out for Loyola as they are one of those teams that are well coached and tend to fly under the radar . Which of the top teams will get a lift from their freshman .

Why would you state: "Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND"? UNC's record vs Notre Dame is 8 - 1 and although UNC's record vs Northwestern is 11 - 11 UNC has won 9 of the last 10 games vs Northwestern. Not a lot of struggling going on vs ND and NU...

I stated it because UNC has not won at ND since 2017 and the last time they played at ND they lost and honestly looked bad ( I happened to be at that game , UNC looked unprepared for an outdoor game that it was snowing at ) . Last year at NW again UNC especially the defense looked jet lagged or something , they won a close game but it was much closer than it should have been.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I do agree lots of talented players at UNC. But I think one big issue that will play a major role is loss of assistant coach KD. They had a very close game with NW, and were just going to tough part of schedule when season cancelled LY. Time will tell and what team put the work in during break will show in the big games.

Should be a fun season. Let’s hope it happens with few delays.

I agree 100 % ,I don’t believe UNC has ever won a national championship with KD not running the offense . I would say they are still the most talented team in the country as they essentially bring their whole team back and will be better in the midfield ( which was their weak spot last year) with the addition of Miller and the return of Hillman but coaching matters . Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND . Look out for Loyola as they are one of those teams that are well coached and tend to fly under the radar . Which of the top teams will get a lift from their freshman .

Why would you state: "Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND"? UNC's record vs Notre Dame is 8 - 1 and although UNC's record vs Northwestern is 11 - 11 UNC has won 9 of the last 10 games vs Northwestern. Not a lot of struggling going on vs ND and NU...

I stated it because UNC has not won at ND since 2017 and the last time they played at ND they lost and honestly looked bad ( I happened to be at that game , UNC looked unprepared for an outdoor game that it was snowing at ) . Last year at NW again UNC especially the defense looked jet lagged or something , they won a close game but it was much closer than it should have been.

UNC has lost exactly one time to ND and that was in 2019. As far as Northwestern is concerned UNC has won 9 of the past 10 games says it all. Notre Dame and Northwestern are both excellent programs so I would not expect UNC to be blowing them out very often.

UNC is a Top 5 Program (some would argue Top 2) Northwestern is a Top 10 Program and Notre Dame is a Top 20 program.

Top 10 Ranking at the end of the season 2015 - 2019 (can't count 2020)

5x - Maryland
5x - North Carolina

4x - Boston College
4x - Princeton
4x - Syracuse

3x - Northwestern
3x - Stony Brook
3x - Florida
3x - Penn State

2x - Virginia
2x - Notre Dame
2x - Loyola
2x - Navy
2x - USC

1x - James Madison
1x - Penn
1x - Denver
1x - Stanford
1x - Duke
1x - Towson

Maryland, UNC, BC, Princeton, Syracuse, Northwestern, Stony Brook, Florida, Virginia and Penn are the only programs to finish the season ranked in the Top 20 from 2015 - 2019.

Notre Dame Finished 4 of the 5 years Ranked in the Top 20.

ND is a pretty darn good program, certainly one of the Top 15 - 20 so I am not surprise to see them upset a Top 5 Team.

Congratulations!

ILWomen 2021 Preseason All-Americans

First Team
A Emily Hawryschuk Gr. Syracuse
A Katie Hoeg R-Sr. North Carolina
A Jamie Ortega Sr. North Carolina
A Izzy Scane Jr. Northwestern
DR/A Maddie Jenner Jr. Duke
M Andie Aldave Sr. Notre Dame
M Ally Kennedy Gr. Stony Brook
M Kerrigan Miller Gr. North Carolina
D Lizzie Colson R-Sr. Maryland
D Ally Palermo Sr. Northwestern
D Emma Trenchard Sr. North Carolina
D Cara Trombetta Gr. Florida
G Bridget Deehan Sr. Notre Dame

Second Team
A Madison Ahern So. Notre Dame
A Charlotte North Sr. Boston College
A Taryn Ohlmiller Gr. Stony Brook
A Livy Rosenzweig Sr. Loyola
DR/A Caitlyn Petro R-Sr. UMass
M Molly Garrett Gr. Michigan
M Shannon Kavanagh Sr. Florida
M Sammy Mueller Gr. Northwestern
D Sarah Cooper Jr. Syracuse
D Kerry Defliese R-Sr. Syracuse
D Katie Detwiler Jr. Loyola
D Emma Schettig So. Notre Dame
G Kaitlyn Larsson Sr. Loyola

Third Team
A Brindi Griffin Gr. Maryland
A Lindsay McKone Gr. Northwestern
A Alyssa Parrella Sr. Hofstra
A Gabby Rosenzweig Gr. Duke
DR/M Brennan Dwyer Sr. Northwestern
M Kasey Choma So. Notre Dame
M Sam Fiedler Sr. Loyola
M Paige Petty Sr. Virginia Tech
D Sami Chenoweth Gr. Towson
D Shay Clevenger Jr. Loyola
D Callie Humphrey Gr. Duke
D Molly Little Gr. Denver
G Taylor Moreno Sr. North Carolina

Honorable Mention
A Megan Carney Jr. Syracuse
A Sam Geiersbach R-Sr. Richmond
A Lauren Gilbert Sr. Northwestern
A Scottie Rose Growney Sr. North Carolina
A Quintin Hoch-Bullen Sr. Denver
A Ashlyn McGovern R-Jr. Virginia
A Caitlin Muir Sr. Michigan
A Meaghan Tyrrell Jr. Syracuse
A Cara Urbank Gr. Boston College
A Emma Vinall Sr. American
DR/A Arden Tierney So. Richmond
M Caroline Blalock Sr. Louisville
M Jay Browne So. Stanford
M Savannah Buchanan Gr. Notre Dame
M Grace Griffin Sr. Maryland
M Brianna Harris R-Sr. Florida
M Jillian Wilson Jr. Loyola
D Emma Johnson R-Sr. James Madison
D Rachel Matey R-So. James Madison
D Kathleen Roe Gr. Notre Dame
G Molly Dougherty R-Jr. James Madison
G Angie Benson Gr. Virginia Tech
G Rachel Hall Jr. Boston College
G Riley Hertford Sr. USC
G Sarah Reznick R-So. Florida
G Jill Rizzo Gr. Ohio State
G Taylor Suplee Jr. Penn State

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Congratulations!

ILWomen 2021 Preseason All-Americans

First Team
A Emily Hawryschuk Gr. Syracuse
A Katie Hoeg R-Sr. North Carolina
A Jamie Ortega Sr. North Carolina
A Izzy Scane Jr. Northwestern
DR/A Maddie Jenner Jr. Duke
M Andie Aldave Sr. Notre Dame
M Ally Kennedy Gr. Stony Brook
M Kerrigan Miller Gr. North Carolina
D Lizzie Colson R-Sr. Maryland
D Ally Palermo Sr. Northwestern
D Emma Trenchard Sr. North Carolina
D Cara Trombetta Gr. Florida
G Bridget Deehan Sr. Notre Dame

Second Team
A Madison Ahern So. Notre Dame
A Charlotte North Sr. Boston College
A Taryn Ohlmiller Gr. Stony Brook
A Livy Rosenzweig Sr. Loyola
DR/A Caitlyn Petro R-Sr. UMass
M Molly Garrett Gr. Michigan
M Shannon Kavanagh Sr. Florida
M Sammy Mueller Gr. Northwestern
D Sarah Cooper Jr. Syracuse
D Kerry Defliese R-Sr. Syracuse
D Katie Detwiler Jr. Loyola
D Emma Schettig So. Notre Dame
G Kaitlyn Larsson Sr. Loyola

Third Team
A Brindi Griffin Gr. Maryland
A Lindsay McKone Gr. Northwestern
A Alyssa Parrella Sr. Hofstra
A Gabby Rosenzweig Gr. Duke
DR/M Brennan Dwyer Sr. Northwestern
M Kasey Choma So. Notre Dame
M Sam Fiedler Sr. Loyola
M Paige Petty Sr. Virginia Tech
D Sami Chenoweth Gr. Towson
D Shay Clevenger Jr. Loyola
D Callie Humphrey Gr. Duke
D Molly Little Gr. Denver
G Taylor Moreno Sr. North Carolina

Honorable Mention
A Megan Carney Jr. Syracuse
A Sam Geiersbach R-Sr. Richmond
A Lauren Gilbert Sr. Northwestern
A Scottie Rose Growney Sr. North Carolina
A Quintin Hoch-Bullen Sr. Denver
A Ashlyn McGovern R-Jr. Virginia
A Caitlin Muir Sr. Michigan
A Meaghan Tyrrell Jr. Syracuse
A Cara Urbank Gr. Boston College
A Emma Vinall Sr. American
DR/A Arden Tierney So. Richmond
M Caroline Blalock Sr. Louisville
M Jay Browne So. Stanford
M Savannah Buchanan Gr. Notre Dame
M Grace Griffin Sr. Maryland
M Brianna Harris R-Sr. Florida
M Jillian Wilson Jr. Loyola
D Emma Johnson R-Sr. James Madison
D Rachel Matey R-So. James Madison
D Kathleen Roe Gr. Notre Dame
G Molly Dougherty R-Jr. James Madison
G Angie Benson Gr. Virginia Tech
G Rachel Hall Jr. Boston College
G Riley Hertford Sr. USC
G Sarah Reznick R-So. Florida
G Jill Rizzo Gr. Ohio State
G Taylor Suplee Jr. Penn State

Congratulations. Good luck to all this year.
Can’t wait to watch some great games in 2021!

Pretty impressive for NY in that more than half of team 1 are NY and even more impressive are the amount of LI players .

Even more impressive is that 6 of them played for the same club team-2016 YJ Defo.

Sorry 4 from Team 1 and 2 from Team 2

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Pretty impressive for NY in that more than half of team 1 are NY and even more impressive are the amount of LI players .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Pretty impressive for NY in that more than half of team 1 are NY and even more impressive are the amount of LI players .

2016 was a very strong class from Long Island. If I remember correctly there were 13 Under Armour All-Americans from The Island that year.

IWLCA Preseason Coaches Poll

1 North Carolina
2 Notre Dame
3 Syracuse
4 Loyola
5 Northwestern
6 Stony Brook
7 Maryland
8 Florida
9 Michigan
10 James Madison
11 Denver
12 Boston College
13 USC
14 Richmond
15 Duke
16 Virginia
17 Penn
18 Virginia Tech
19 Dartmouth
20 UMass
T-21 Navy
T-21 Penn State
23 Stanford
24 Colorado
25 Princeton

Just don't see Notre Dame or Loyola being better than Stony Brook, Maryland or Northwestern.

Just don't see Notre Dame or Loyola being better than Stony Brook, Maryland or Northwestern

Must not of watched much lax last year..

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just don't see Notre Dame or Loyola being better than Stony Brook, Maryland or Northwestern

Must not of watched much lax last year..

Pretty sure that nobody watched much lax last year...

Both ND and Loyola will be very good (as will Northwestern, Stony Brook and Maryland)

In the end, it will all come down to overall Team Defense and goalie play as it always does...

Good luck to all!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I do agree lots of talented players at UNC. But I think one big issue that will play a major role is loss of assistant coach KD. They had a very close game with NW, and were just going to tough part of schedule when season cancelled LY. Time will tell and what team put the work in during break will show in the big games.

Should be a fun season. Let’s hope it happens with few delays.

I agree 100 % ,I don’t believe UNC has ever won a national championship with KD not running the offense . I would say they are still the most talented team in the country as they essentially bring their whole team back and will be better in the midfield ( which was their weak spot last year) with the addition of Miller and the return of Hillman but coaching matters . Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND . Look out for Loyola as they are one of those teams that are well coached and tend to fly under the radar . Which of the top teams will get a lift from their freshman .

I wonder if many of the freshman will get as much opportunity this year as they might have in a regular year with a lot of 5th years staying? Was nice to see some LI freshman getting mentions in the USLacrosse preview articles. Good luck to all.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

IWLCA Preseason Coaches Poll

1 North Carolina
2 Notre Dame
3 Syracuse
4 Loyola
5 Northwestern
6 Stony Brook
7 Maryland
8 Florida
9 Michigan
10 James Madison
11 Denver
12 Boston College
13 USC
14 Richmond
15 Duke
16 Virginia
17 Penn
18 Virginia Tech
19 Dartmouth
20 UMass
T-21 Navy
T-21 Penn State
23 Stanford
24 Colorado
25 Princeton

Just don't see Notre Dame or Loyola being better than Stony Brook, Maryland or Northwestern.

I see three Ivies in the top 25. Are all the student athletes playing? If I remember I saw that something like 15 Princton girls are not even in school.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I do agree lots of talented players at UNC. But I think one big issue that will play a major role is loss of assistant coach KD. They had a very close game with NW, and were just going to tough part of schedule when season cancelled LY. Time will tell and what team put the work in during break will show in the big games.

Should be a fun season. Let’s hope it happens with few delays.

I agree 100 % ,I don’t believe UNC has ever won a national championship with KD not running the offense . I would say they are still the most talented team in the country as they essentially bring their whole team back and will be better in the midfield ( which was their weak spot last year) with the addition of Miller and the return of Hillman but coaching matters . Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND . Look out for Loyola as they are one of those teams that are well coached and tend to fly under the radar . Which of the top teams will get a lift from their freshman .

I wonder if many of the freshman will get as much opportunity this year as they might have in a regular year with a lot of 5th years staying? Was nice to see some LI freshman getting mentions in the USLacrosse preview articles. Good luck to all.

IMHO It all depends on the caliber of program.... (and of to some extent the caliber of the athlete)... Much tougher for freshmen to break in at Top 10 caliber programs. That said, it really depends on how many "starters" have to be replaced from the previous year. Much easier for a freshman to beat out a "reserve player" than to beat out a returning starter. The 5th year players and "stud transfers" will make it more difficult for the freshmen who have to compete with them.

High caliber freshmen who may have slipped through the recruiting cracks and are now at a second tier program will most likely play from day one. Top recruits at Top 5 - 10 programs may not see the field right away.

Good luck to all and yes, nice to see Long Island Players getting some hype.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

IWLCA Preseason Coaches Poll

1 North Carolina
2 Notre Dame
3 Syracuse
4 Loyola
5 Northwestern
6 Stony Brook
7 Maryland
8 Florida
9 Michigan
10 James Madison
11 Denver
12 Boston College
13 USC
14 Richmond
15 Duke
16 Virginia
17 Penn
18 Virginia Tech
19 Dartmouth
20 UMass
T-21 Navy
T-21 Penn State
23 Stanford
24 Colorado
25 Princeton

Just don't see Notre Dame or Loyola being better than Stony Brook, Maryland or Northwestern.

I see three Ivies in the top 25. Are all the student athletes playing? If I remember I saw that something like 15 Princton girls are not even in school.

I only see 2 Ivy's

Originally Posted by Anonymous

IWLCA Preseason Coaches Poll

1 North Carolina
2 Notre Dame
3 Syracuse
4 Loyola
5 Northwestern
6 Stony Brook
7 Maryland
8 Florida
9 Michigan
10 James Madison
11 Denver
12 Boston College
13 USC
14 Richmond
15 Duke
16 Virginia
17 Penn
18 Virginia Tech
19 Dartmouth
20 UMass
T-21 Navy
T-21 Penn State
23 Stanford
24 Colorado
25 Princeton

Just don't see Notre Dame or Loyola being better than Stony Brook, Maryland or Northwestern.

I see three Ivies in the top 25. Are all the student athletes playing? If I remember I saw that something like 15 Princton girls are not even in school.

Yeah, not sure what to make of these rankings. I guess the reality is that once you look beyond the traditional Top 10 - 15 teams nobody knows which teams to rank.

Due to the current situation I can’t see any of the three Ivy’s listed above finishing in the Top 20 this year

The question is, what teams should be ranked in place of the 3 Ivy’s?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

IWLCA Preseason Coaches Poll

1 North Carolina
2 Notre Dame
3 Syracuse
4 Loyola
5 Northwestern
6 Stony Brook
7 Maryland
8 Florida
9 Michigan
10 James Madison
11 Denver
12 Boston College
13 USC
14 Richmond
15 Duke
16 Virginia
17 Penn
18 Virginia Tech
19 Dartmouth
20 UMass
T-21 Navy
T-21 Penn State
23 Stanford
24 Colorado
25 Princeton

Just don't see Notre Dame or Loyola being better than Stony Brook, Maryland or Northwestern.

I see three Ivies in the top 25. Are all the student athletes playing? If I remember I saw that something like 15 Princton girls are not even in school.

I only see 2 Ivy's

Penn, Dartmouth and Princeton

Originally Posted by Anonymous

IWLCA Preseason Coaches Poll

1 North Carolina
2 Notre Dame
3 Syracuse
4 Loyola
5 Northwestern
6 Stony Brook
7 Maryland
8 Florida
9 Michigan
10 James Madison
11 Denver
12 Boston College
13 USC
14 Richmond
15 Duke
16 Virginia
17 Penn
18 Virginia Tech
19 Dartmouth
20 UMass
T-21 Navy
T-21 Penn State
23 Stanford
24 Colorado
25 Princeton

Just don't see Notre Dame or Loyola being better than Stony Brook, Maryland or Northwestern.

I see three Ivies in the top 25. Are all the student athletes playing? If I remember I saw that something like 15 Princton girls are not even in school.

Yeah, not sure what to make of these rankings. I guess the reality is that once you look beyond the traditional Top 10 - 15 teams nobody knows which teams to rank.

Due to the current situation I can’t see any of the three Ivy’s listed above finishing in the Top 20 this year

The question is, what teams should be ranked in place of the 3 Ivy’s?

Just looked at the Princeton article again and it states that "19" players did not enroll this year. It looks like just about all of the mainstay players from 2020 opted out. I know that Princeton is a great program but a Top 25 ranking is a bit unrealistic to say the least. Not trying to knock The Tigers, I do not think any program "Maryland, North Carolina, Northwestern, Syracuse" etc... would be Top 25 at the end of the season playing without 15 - 20 of their best players. I guess the coaches must not think that there are many competitive teams outside the usual suspects. You would think that the coaches voting in the poll are aware of the situation at Princeton as well as other Ivy programs. Hearing Princeton is not the only program with players withdrawing from school.

NESCAC schools have announced they will wait until late March to make a decision on spring sports. They can still practice which traditional starts 2/15. Several programs has student athletes positive for COVID and four schools don't have students on campus.

The polls, always subjective, are more subjective this year.

If D1 mens basketball is showing is that a positive case can make a schedule difficult. Villanova went almost a month without playing, positive cases has caused Iona fits and many programs put on hold. Lets hope things get a bit better in the next month. 14 day "sit outs" are tough.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

IWLCA Preseason Coaches Poll

1 North Carolina
2 Notre Dame
3 Syracuse
4 Loyola
5 Northwestern
6 Stony Brook
7 Maryland
8 Florida
9 Michigan
10 James Madison
11 Denver
12 Boston College
13 USC
14 Richmond
15 Duke
16 Virginia
17 Penn
18 Virginia Tech
19 Dartmouth
20 UMass
T-21 Navy
T-21 Penn State
23 Stanford
24 Colorado
25 Princeton

Just don't see Notre Dame or Loyola being better than Stony Brook, Maryland or Northwestern.

I see three Ivies in the top 25. Are all the student athletes playing? If I remember I saw that something like 15 Princton girls are not even in school.

Yeah, not sure what to make of these rankings. I guess the reality is that once you look beyond the traditional Top 10 - 15 teams nobody knows which teams to rank.

Due to the current situation I can’t see any of the three Ivy’s listed above finishing in the Top 20 this year

The question is, what teams should be ranked in place of the 3 Ivy’s?

Just looked at the Princeton article again and it states that "19" players did not enroll this year. It looks like just about all of the mainstay players from 2020 opted out. I know that Princeton is a great program but a Top 25 ranking is a bit unrealistic to say the least. Not trying to knock The Tigers, I do not think any program "Maryland, North Carolina, Northwestern, Syracuse" etc... would be Top 25 at the end of the season playing without 15 - 20 of their best players. I guess the coaches must not think that there are many competitive teams outside the usual suspects. You would think that the coaches voting in the poll are aware of the situation at Princeton as well as other Ivy programs. Hearing Princeton is not the only program with players withdrawing from school.

On the men's side 40 of 48 Yale Players withdrew from school and apparently a bunch of Cornell men just withdrew as well. Is this happening on the women's side also?

As far as the ranking go, what teams should be ranked in place of the Ivy's? Towson? Hofstra? ??

Just read that UMass has shut down sports til March

Maryland vs Hopkins cancelled as well. This will be the entire seasons issue. Not good for the teams and players.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just don't see Notre Dame or Loyola being better than Stony Brook, Maryland or Northwestern

Must not of watched much lax last year..

Pretty sure that nobody watched much lax last year...

Both ND and Loyola will be very good (as will Northwestern, Stony Brook and Maryland)

In the end, it will all come down to overall Team Defense and goalie play as it always does...

Good luck to all!

Look no further than The Supper Bowl... it will be defense and goalie play that will determine which team wins the championship.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just don't see Notre Dame or Loyola being better than Stony Brook, Maryland or Northwestern

Must not of watched much lax last year..

Pretty sure that nobody watched much lax last year...

Both ND and Loyola will be very good (as will Northwestern, Stony Brook and Maryland)

In the end, it will all come down to overall Team Defense and goalie play as it always does...

Good luck to all!

Look no further than The Supper Bowl... it will be defense and goalie play that will determine which team wins the championship.

Football has a goalie?

JMU shut down as well

Originally Posted by Anonymous

JMU shut down as well

Are they shut down or was their game postponed because their Covid protocol did not meet that of the ACC

Originally Posted by Anonymous

JMU shut down as well

Are they shut down or was their game postponed because their Covid protocol did not meet that of the ACC

You mean ACC lack of standard???

Originally Posted by Anonymous

JMU shut down as well

Are they shut down or was their game postponed because their Covid protocol did not meet that of the ACC

You mean ACC lack of standard???

No I meant maybe the JMU protocols after positive Covid tests did not reach the standards set by the ACC for their teams to play . If the JMU protocols exceeded that of the ACC then I suspect that would be good enough.

Stony Brook heading to UNC for Sunday game! Two teams with legitimate shot at The Final Four. Should be a good game. IMHO both teams “Win” for making this happen.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stony Brook heading to UNC for Sunday game! Two teams with legitimate shot at The Final Four. Should be a good game. IMHO both teams “Win” for making this happen.

Maybe but honestly I am surprised UNC took the game as they have everything to lose and not much to gain other than experience. My guess is Levy and Spallina both coaching the US team had something to do with it. Should be an interesting game as in my opinion UNC has the deeper more talented players but SBU the much better coach.Also all these early season games are going to most likely be very sloppy with the teams not having played in real games in some time.

I think when looking back on this season, the biggest accomplishments will be getting in as many games as possible under a ton of restrictions and obstacles.. wins and loses will be a distant second. kudos for the coaches and players getting after it anyway possible.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stony Brook heading to UNC for Sunday game! Two teams with legitimate shot at The Final Four. Should be a good game. IMHO both teams “Win” for making this happen.

Maybe but honestly I am surprised UNC took the game as they have everything to lose and not much to gain other than experience. My guess is Levy and Spallina both coaching the US team had something to do with it. Should be an interesting game as in my opinion UNC has the deeper more talented players but SBU the much better coach.Also all these early season games are going to most likely be very sloppy with the teams not having played in real games in some time.

UNC has everything to lose? What do they have to lose? It is a game, that is all and that is all they have to lose.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

IWLCA Preseason Coaches Poll

1 North Carolina
2 Notre Dame
3 Syracuse
4 Loyola
5 Northwestern
6 Stony Brook
7 Maryland
8 Florida
9 Michigan
10 James Madison
11 Denver
12 Boston College
13 USC
14 Richmond
15 Duke
16 Virginia
17 Penn
18 Virginia Tech
19 Dartmouth
20 UMass
T-21 Navy
T-21 Penn State
23 Stanford
24 Colorado
25 Princeton

Just don't see Notre Dame or Loyola being better than Stony Brook, Maryland or Northwestern.

Duke is not Top 20.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stony Brook heading to UNC for Sunday game! Two teams with legitimate shot at The Final Four. Should be a good game. IMHO both teams “Win” for making this happen.

Maybe but honestly I am surprised UNC took the game as they have everything to lose and not much to gain other than experience. My guess is Levy and Spallina both coaching the US team had something to do with it. Should be an interesting game as in my opinion UNC has the deeper more talented players but SBU the much better coach.Also all these early season games are going to most likely be very sloppy with the teams not having played in real games in some time.

UNC has everything to lose? What do they have to lose? It is a game, that is all and that is all they have to lose.

You must be a complete bore , thanks for the it’s a game captain obvious . What does UNC have to lose , well they could lose their #1 ranking in every poll ,they could lose a possible top NCAA tournament seeding , they could lose some of their programs luster by loosing this game , say what you want but pretty much everyone outside of Long Islanders has UNC as a top tier program with Maryland and has Stony Brook below that level .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stony Brook heading to UNC for Sunday game! Two teams with legitimate shot at The Final Four. Should be a good game. IMHO both teams “Win” for making this happen.

Maybe but honestly I am surprised UNC took the game as they have everything to lose and not much to gain other than experience. My guess is Levy and Spallina both coaching the US team had something to do with it. Should be an interesting game as in my opinion UNC has the deeper more talented players but SBU the much better coach.Also all these early season games are going to most likely be very sloppy with the teams not having played in real games in some time.

UNC has everything to lose? What do they have to lose? It is a game, that is all and that is all they have to lose.

You must be a complete bore , thanks for the it’s a game captain obvious . What does UNC have to lose , well they could lose their #1 ranking in every poll ,they could lose a possible top NCAA tournament seeding , they could lose some of their programs luster by loosing this game , say what you want but pretty much everyone outside of Long Islanders has UNC as a top tier program with Maryland and has Stony Brook below that level .

Call me crazy... I am of the mindset that good coaches and players want to compete. They want to challenge themselves, they don’t want to hide and hope they remain ranked #1. They believe in themselves and they believe in their team and they welcome the opportunity to prove it on the field.

On the other hand I guess there are some who believe in hype, polls and opinion and would therefore not want to jeopardize some lofty status by actually going out of their way to challenge themselves.

Nothing to lose, everything to learn.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stony Brook heading to UNC for Sunday game! Two teams with legitimate shot at The Final Four. Should be a good game. IMHO both teams “Win” for making this happen.

Maybe but honestly I am surprised UNC took the game as they have everything to lose and not much to gain other than experience. My guess is Levy and Spallina both coaching the US team had something to do with it. Should be an interesting game as in my opinion UNC has the deeper more talented players but SBU the much better coach.Also all these early season games are going to most likely be very sloppy with the teams not having played in real games in some time.

UNC has everything to lose? What do they have to lose? It is a game, that is all and that is all they have to lose.

You must be a complete bore , thanks for the it’s a game captain obvious . What does UNC have to lose , well they could lose their #1 ranking in every poll ,they could lose a possible top NCAA tournament seeding , they could lose some of their programs luster by loosing this game , say what you want but pretty much everyone outside of Long Islanders has UNC as a top tier program with Maryland and has Stony Brook below that level .

Those who are afraid to lose will never win.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stony Brook heading to UNC for Sunday game! Two teams with legitimate shot at The Final Four. Should be a good game. IMHO both teams “Win” for making this happen.

Maybe but honestly I am surprised UNC took the game as they have everything to lose and not much to gain other than experience. My guess is Levy and Spallina both coaching the US team had something to do with it. Should be an interesting game as in my opinion UNC has the deeper more talented players but SBU the much better coach.Also all these early season games are going to most likely be very sloppy with the teams not having played in real games in some time.

UNC has everything to lose? What do they have to lose? It is a game, that is all and that is all they have to lose.

You must be a complete bore , thanks for the it’s a game captain obvious . What does UNC have to lose , well they could lose their #1 ranking in every poll ,they could lose a possible top NCAA tournament seeding , they could lose some of their programs luster by loosing this game , say what you want but pretty much everyone outside of Long Islanders has UNC as a top tier program with Maryland and has Stony Brook below that level .

No one is disputing that at all. Maryland and UNC in a class by themselves some up years some years not as good but better than most teams best. This game wouldn’t change that
Its a fun game yes UNC is probably one of the most loaded rosters ever. While I think SB will be game and play hard as heck. I think the game in two days notice hurts SB as I think the only place they are better is with the coach and 3 days to prep will be nearly impossible People love SB on here and people beat up SB on here truth is great job by both programs saying “let’s play “. I have UNC 18-13

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

Defense, Goalie and Coaching was the difference and the reasons why UNC won the game.

If you saw the game on TV the art of beating a zone is ball movement. UNC found the open cutter inside all day long. Can’t push out that far on that type of zone without serious pressure on ball. SB was trying to catch up to ball day.

Much better Coach, really? SB was out of their league.

So excited that the games are back (for now LOL). My daughter is in high school and it’s fun to see if anyone familiar has any stats yet. But I need to ask...the rosters seem to be bursting at the seams and how many classes will go all five years? The current freshman do not have to extra year but the sophomores do- will most take the fiftieth year by then? How will all of this pan out in the end?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

SB overrated freshman did nothing either!! JS overrates his players but the truth comes out when games are played!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Much better Coach, really? SB was out of their league.

We were actually saying when it was 10-7 w 15 minutes to go that if coaches were reversed NC would of been up 10. My daughter is a UNC alum and
This is the most talented roster as long as we have been around. Great job by SB got the game really close after halftime and even better job by these teams to pull the game together. Should be a fun fun season

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Much better Coach, really? SB was out of their league.

We were actually saying when it was 10-7 w 15 minutes to go that if coaches were reversed NC would of been up 10. My daughter is a UNC alum and
This is the most talented roster as long as we have been around. Great job by SB got the game really close after halftime and even better job by these teams to pull the game together. Should be a fun fun season

They were doubled up... not that close. Definitely out coached today.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

SB overrated freshman did nothing either!! JS overrates his players but the truth comes out when games are played!

Neither did wurzburger was hoping both would produce

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

SB overrated freshman did nothing either!! JS overrates his players but the truth comes out when games are played!

Personally think freshman will really show how much mixing their senior years hurt them. Two IL top 10 players today in UNC SB game didn’t do much at all Hopefully this season fully goes. Rosters are over flowing

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Much better Coach, really? SB was out of their league.

We were actually saying when it was 10-7 w 15 minutes to go that if coaches were reversed NC would of been up 10. My daughter is a UNC alum and
This is the most talented roster as long as we have been around. Great job by SB got the game really close after halftime and even better job by these teams to pull the game together. Should be a fun fun season

Don’t love all Spallina’s antics with pumping his players up but guy can coach. Always say you can judge a coach by how they start a game (preparation ) and how they start a half (adjustments) evident today Think UNC is just too good and will be all year but at 9-7 at almost half way of second half I was concerned. Regardless just glad kids are playing

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Much better Coach, really? SB was out of their league.

We were actually saying when it was 10-7 w 15 minutes to go that if coaches were reversed NC would of been up 10. My daughter is a UNC alum and
This is the most talented roster as long as we have been around. Great job by SB got the game really close after halftime and even better job by these teams to pull the game together. Should be a fun fun season

Don’t love all Spallina’s antics with pumping his players up but guy can coach. Always say you can judge a coach by how they start a game (preparation ) and how they start a half (adjustments) evident today Think UNC is just too good and will be all year but at 9-7 at almost half way of second half I was concerned. Regardless just glad kids are playing

The rest of the world judges coaches on how they finish games and seasons... get a grip, SBU out coached today.

Missed the game yesterday do to rec basketball. No lax up here yet. Just watched replay.

Overall a good game with high and lows. I do agree with poster on JS and coaching. The fact the score was 9-7 with 20 mins to go was impressive. (JS isn’t getting A team YJ and TG players) The 3 goals out of the half was adjustments on the D end of field. That is coaching. SB also had numerous shots over cage that if a couple went in maybe a different ball game. The UNC defense and goalie were outstanding. I know the Offense gets all the attention but the D was very good. Many 5th years on D and it showed.

Both teams are very mature and big players with years of playing in big games when looking at rosters. They better win this year as many graduate. The next years could be rough once this group graduates.

As far as younger players they will learn as season progresses. At looking at the top teams(caught NW game) I am not sure why these coaches don’t red shirt the younger players. They still practice with team, but heck save the year. I think we will hear more this very soon for the younger kids not getting playing time.

Great to see lax back and playing.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

SB overrated freshman did nothing either!! JS overrates his players but the truth comes out when games are played!

Personally think freshman will really show how much mixing their senior years hurt them. Two IL top 10 players today in UNC SB game didn’t do much at all Hopefully this season fully goes. Rosters are over flowing

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

SB overrated freshman did nothing either!! JS overrates his players but the truth comes out when games are played!

Personally think freshman will really show how much mixing their senior years hurt them. Two IL top 10 players today in UNC SB game didn’t do much at all Hopefully this season fully goes. Rosters are over flowing

Both those girls were way overrated since day 1. Now we can see why. Looked like deer in the headlights. The UNC superstar freshman never played anyone, and racked up points in HS against terrible competition. My favorite part of the game way when AK layed JO. Wouldn’t want to get in her way! Girl plays with a lot of heart! There was also quite a bit of flopping in that game. Why did JS have a fit when his player was hit in the neck, when SB did the same thing on the other side? And how do girls get all these free shots trying do barrel through defenses, then flopping to the ground?

“My favorite part of the game way when AK layed JO”

Seriously your favorite part of the game was watching a player get hurt . Sorry but it was easy to see why the reputation of theSBU team and that player in particular is what it is . Not sure why US Lacrosse wants that being what represents them , there are plenty of talented players and coaches to choose from that are actually good role models .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“My favorite part of the game way when AK layed JO”

Seriously your favorite part of the game was watching a player get hurt . Sorry but it was easy to see why the reputation of theSBU team and that player in particular is what it is . Not sure why US Lacrosse wants that being what represents them , there are plenty of talented players and coaches to choose from that are actually good role models .

Thug ball! Girl is lucky she didn't get a season-ending injury with that hit. In football, the player would have been ejected for lowering the shoulder like that! Should at the very least have been a yellow!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“My favorite part of the game way when AK layed JO”

Seriously your favorite part of the game was watching a player get hurt . Sorry but it was easy to see why the reputation of theSBU team and that player in particular is what it is . Not sure why US Lacrosse wants that being what represents them , there are plenty of talented players and coaches to choose from that are actually good role models .

Unfortunately, there are WAY too many parents out there that LOVE to watch players get hurt. Shows that whoever their daughter plays for is taught to play that way...learn to play right and you won't NEED to hurt a player.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

SB overrated freshman did nothing either!! JS overrates his players but the truth comes out when games are played!

The bitterness never ends... What is the matter with you people. Still jealous that these players receive more attention and recognition than your daughter? As far as I know, players do not rank or rate themselves so I never understand why small minded bitter parents come on here and try to tear the players down.

19 UNC players saw playing time vs SBU, 14 of the 19 were Under Armour All-Americans. I believe at least 17 of 19 were Ranked in the Top 50 by Inside Lacrosse coming out of HS. UNC has all 12 starters back from last season with a number of returning All-Americans. The fact that the "big transfer" stepped right into the starting lineup speaks volumes as to her ability. For a freshmen to even get playing time is also very impressive. Just about all of the UNC players who saw action were highly touted coming out of HS and it looks like they are living up to they hype.

Stony Brook is also a very good team with a fair share of AA caliber players so for their freshmen to get playing time against UNC is also impressive.

Any player who starts and or plays a regular roll on a Top 10 caliber team is an excellent player. As a matter of fact, there are many players at Top Programs who rarely see the field who would walk right in and start at Teams outside the Top 10 - 15.

So keep on hating and telling yourself that your daughter is better and should have received more recognition.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Much better Coach, really? SB was out of their league.

We were actually saying when it was 10-7 w 15 minutes to go that if coaches were reversed NC would of been up 10. My daughter is a UNC alum and
This is the most talented roster as long as we have been around. Great job by SB got the game really close after halftime and even better job by these teams to pull the game together. Should be a fun fun season

They were doubled up... not that close. Definitely out coached today.

SBU just doesn’t do a good job on defense and HC doesn’t recruit the top defenders. Playing a gimmick backer defense doesn’t work at college level. Way to many easy goals despite the good play of SBU goalie. Clearing was also a problem. I know everyone wants to see goals but defense wins. Sooo..... is that coaching, recruiting or a combination???

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Missed the game yesterday do to rec basketball. No lax up here yet. Just watched replay.

Overall a good game with high and lows. I do agree with poster on JS and coaching. The fact the score was 9-7 with 20 mins to go was impressive. (JS isn’t getting A team YJ and TG players) The 3 goals out of the half was adjustments on the D end of field. That is coaching. SB also had numerous shots over cage that if a couple went in maybe a different ball game. The UNC defense and goalie were outstanding. I know the Offense gets all the attention but the D was very good. Many 5th years on D and it showed.

Both teams are very mature and big players with years of playing in big games when looking at rosters. They better win this year as many graduate. The next years could be rough once this group graduates.

As far as younger players they will learn as season progresses. At looking at the top teams(caught NW game) I am not sure why these coaches don’t red shirt the younger players. They still practice with team, but heck save the year. I think we will hear more this very soon for the younger kids not getting playing time.

Great to see lax back and playing.

Agree on this

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

SB overrated freshman did nothing either!! JS overrates his players but the truth comes out when games are played!

The bitterness never ends... What is the matter with you people. Still jealous that these players receive more attention and recognition than your daughter? As far as I know, players do not rank or rate themselves so I never understand why small minded bitter parents come on here and try to tear the players down.

19 UNC players saw playing time vs SBU, 14 of the 19 were Under Armour All-Americans. I believe at least 17 of 19 were Ranked in the Top 50 by Inside Lacrosse coming out of HS. UNC has all 12 starters back from last season with a number of returning All-Americans. The fact that the "big transfer" stepped right into the starting lineup speaks volumes as to her ability. For a freshmen to even get playing time is also very impressive. Just about all of the UNC players who saw action were highly touted coming out of HS and it looks like they are living up to they hype.

Stony Brook is also a very good team with a fair share of AA caliber players so for their freshmen to get playing time against UNC is also impressive.

Any player who starts and or plays a regular roll on a Top 10 caliber team is an excellent player. As a matter of fact, there are many players at Top Programs who rarely see the field who would walk right in and start at Teams outside the Top 10 - 15.

So keep on hating and telling yourself that your daughter is better and should have received more recognition.

Lol, ran around the field doing nothing. Freshman on other teams putting up big points! If you’re an attacker on the field significant minutes and don’t score a goal or get an assist. You’re not a top player, sorry!

I do agree an attacker 95 percent of time needs to contribute. But it also depends on what team your on, role you play and competition played that weekend. Some games played this week in other conferences were tops vs bottoms. Be interesting to see when they play each other .

All good. Look forward to another week of as many Covid free games we can get in.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Much better Coach, really? SB was out of their league.

We were actually saying when it was 10-7 w 15 minutes to go that if coaches were reversed NC would of been up 10. My daughter is a UNC alum and
This is the most talented roster as long as we have been around. Great job by SB got the game really close after halftime and even better job by these teams to pull the game together. Should be a fun fun season

They were doubled up... not that close. Definitely out coached today.

SBU just doesn’t do a good job on defense and HC doesn’t recruit the top defenders. Playing a gimmick backer defense doesn’t work at college level. Way to many easy goals despite the good play of SBU goalie. Clearing was also a problem. I know everyone wants to see goals but defense wins. Sooo..... is that coaching, recruiting or a combination???

Last time that I checked "recruiting" was part of a college coaches job... Both the offensive and defensive schemes used by UNC were better than the ones SBU used. UNC didn't need superstars to exploit the SBU Defensive Scheme, all they needed to do was work the game plan / strategy. I didn't see any adjustments from SBU on either side of the ball.

Agree 100% that the team that plays the best defense will win.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

SB overrated freshman did nothing either!! JS overrates his players but the truth comes out when games are played!

The bitterness never ends... What is the matter with you people. Still jealous that these players receive more attention and recognition than your daughter? As far as I know, players do not rank or rate themselves so I never understand why small minded bitter parents come on here and try to tear the players down.

19 UNC players saw playing time vs SBU, 14 of the 19 were Under Armour All-Americans. I believe at least 17 of 19 were Ranked in the Top 50 by Inside Lacrosse coming out of HS. UNC has all 12 starters back from last season with a number of returning All-Americans. The fact that the "big transfer" stepped right into the starting lineup speaks volumes as to her ability. For a freshmen to even get playing time is also very impressive. Just about all of the UNC players who saw action were highly touted coming out of HS and it looks like they are living up to they hype.

Stony Brook is also a very good team with a fair share of AA caliber players so for their freshmen to get playing time against UNC is also impressive.

Any player who starts and or plays a regular roll on a Top 10 caliber team is an excellent player. As a matter of fact, there are many players at Top Programs who rarely see the field who would walk right in and start at Teams outside the Top 10 - 15.

So keep on hating and telling yourself that your daughter is better and should have received more recognition.

Lol, ran around the field doing nothing. Freshman on other teams putting up big points! If you’re an attacker on the field significant minutes and don’t score a goal or get an assist. You’re not a top player, sorry!

She did score, just also received a yellow card in the process..so it didn't "count"

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

SB overrated freshman did nothing either!! JS overrates his players but the truth comes out when games are played!

The bitterness never ends... What is the matter with you people. Still jealous that these players receive more attention and recognition than your daughter? As far as I know, players do not rank or rate themselves so I never understand why small minded bitter parents come on here and try to tear the players down.

19 UNC players saw playing time vs SBU, 14 of the 19 were Under Armour All-Americans. I believe at least 17 of 19 were Ranked in the Top 50 by Inside Lacrosse coming out of HS. UNC has all 12 starters back from last season with a number of returning All-Americans. The fact that the "big transfer" stepped right into the starting lineup speaks volumes as to her ability. For a freshmen to even get playing time is also very impressive. Just about all of the UNC players who saw action were highly touted coming out of HS and it looks like they are living up to they hype.

Stony Brook is also a very good team with a fair share of AA caliber players so for their freshmen to get playing time against UNC is also impressive.

Any player who starts and or plays a regular roll on a Top 10 caliber team is an excellent player. As a matter of fact, there are many players at Top Programs who rarely see the field who would walk right in and start at Teams outside the Top 10 - 15.

So keep on hating and telling yourself that your daughter is better and should have received more recognition.

Truth be told I do not love or detest SB will say as a Carolina had 15/19 players that played are UA AA. JUST looked and SB had one just different recruiting outside of power 5 conferences those mid majors are required to coach much harder Kids will always gravitate to top power 5’s facilities location mom and dads egos etc. That’s why I always chuckle with the SB detest. Of course they pump up their players and do what they can in social media it’s only shot they have in recruiting and fact that schools like them are able to compete every year at the high level is impressive. They hve to sell themselves differently than the money places. How many on here don’t understand tht makes me think your daughters are on the power 5 side and wish you got that love. I have a son who plays mid major school top 20 lacrosse and a daughter who plays power 5. It is so different and if many knew the obstacles mid majors face you would understand much more
Was flipping back and forth from SB UNC to men’s game and missed end of first half but I will say that SB came out second half and was a play or two away from that being very interesting One thing everyone in here agrees about is UNC is best team by a good margin fact that the game was tight halfway through second half tells me all I need to know All out kids had life’s changed by pandemic let’s all just be glad some type of normal is back

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

SB overrated freshman did nothing either!! JS overrates his players but the truth comes out when games are played!

The bitterness never ends... What is the matter with you people. Still jealous that these players receive more attention and recognition than your daughter? As far as I know, players do not rank or rate themselves so I never understand why small minded bitter parents come on here and try to tear the players down.

19 UNC players saw playing time vs SBU, 14 of the 19 were Under Armour All-Americans. I believe at least 17 of 19 were Ranked in the Top 50 by Inside Lacrosse coming out of HS. UNC has all 12 starters back from last season with a number of returning All-Americans. The fact that the "big transfer" stepped right into the starting lineup speaks volumes as to her ability. For a freshmen to even get playing time is also very impressive. Just about all of the UNC players who saw action were highly touted coming out of HS and it looks like they are living up to they hype.

Stony Brook is also a very good team with a fair share of AA caliber players so for their freshmen to get playing time against UNC is also impressive.

Any player who starts and or plays a regular roll on a Top 10 caliber team is an excellent player. As a matter of fact, there are many players at Top Programs who rarely see the field who would walk right in and start at Teams outside the Top 10 - 15.

So keep on hating and telling yourself that your daughter is better and should have received more recognition.

Lol, ran around the field doing nothing. Freshman on other teams putting up big points! If you’re an attacker on the field significant minutes and don’t score a goal or get an assist. You’re not a top player, sorry!

What an ignorant opinion.

Typical armchair player/coach. You do understand that you can not compare players or statistics in women’s DI lacrosse because it is not an apple’s to apple’s comparison, it’s not a level playing field. Once you go outside the top 10-15 teams there is a pretty big drop off in terms of competition/talent.

I watched Stony Brook Men’s game and saw a transfer from Maryland put up 6 goals and 1 assist. Looks like a great player but last year at Maryland he was unable to break into the lineup. By your logic the kid must have been overhyped and “not a top player”. He looked like a top player to me, problem is a Maryland just about every player is a top player.

Getting on the field at a top program when competing against other top programs is a much more difficult task than playing on a less competitive team. Many players at top programs who see little to no time would walk in and start right away at less competitive programs. Many players who look like superstars at less competitive programs wouldn’t get on the field at top tier program.

Not knocking players just pointing out reality. Stony Brook and UNC are both Top Tier programs with a lot of talent (especially UNC) if a player is getting on the field in the competitive games they are most certainly an excellent player.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

SB overrated freshman did nothing either!! JS overrates his players but the truth comes out when games are played!

The bitterness never ends... What is the matter with you people. Still jealous that these players receive more attention and recognition than your daughter? As far as I know, players do not rank or rate themselves so I never understand why small minded bitter parents come on here and try to tear the players down.

19 UNC players saw playing time vs SBU, 14 of the 19 were Under Armour All-Americans. I believe at least 17 of 19 were Ranked in the Top 50 by Inside Lacrosse coming out of HS. UNC has all 12 starters back from last season with a number of returning All-Americans. The fact that the "big transfer" stepped right into the starting lineup speaks volumes as to her ability. For a freshmen to even get playing time is also very impressive. Just about all of the UNC players who saw action were highly touted coming out of HS and it looks like they are living up to they hype.

Stony Brook is also a very good team with a fair share of AA caliber players so for their freshmen to get playing time against UNC is also impressive.

Any player who starts and or plays a regular roll on a Top 10 caliber team is an excellent player. As a matter of fact, there are many players at Top Programs who rarely see the field who would walk right in and start at Teams outside the Top 10 - 15.

So keep on hating and telling yourself that your daughter is better and should have received more recognition.

Lol, ran around the field doing nothing. Freshman on other teams putting up big points! If you’re an attacker on the field significant minutes and don’t score a goal or get an assist. You’re not a top player, sorry!

She did score, just also received a yellow card in the process..so it didn't "count"

Lol, that’s funny. Yes you are correct, it didn’t count, and a yellow is not a good stat to boast about. Was also pathetic at how many girls on both teams couldn’t even catch the ball. Not overly impressed with either team

In hindsight, they should’ve looked into holding a Fall 20’ season where all the “Covid” redshirted kids would have to use their eligibility. Spring season could have been business as usual.

With that said, this whole Covid experience has taken its toll on my daughter & her teammates so considering what they are being put though to remain Covid contact free just to play this season they’ve earned the right, with hope, a normal extra season.

Who has legit shot at Final Four?

1 - North Carolina... Obviously ;-)

2 - Northwestern... will put up big #’s . Not sure about D.

3 - Maryland... not ready to count The Terps out.

4 - Syracuse... ? Let’s see how they do vs SBU.

5 - Notre Dame.... have they ever made it to Final Four?

6 - Florida... certainly in the mix.

7 - Loyola... would like to see it.

8 - Stony Brook... Syracuse game will be telling.

Anyone else?

Virginia? Boston College? JMU? Navy? Penn State?

What a bunch of nonsense. Spallina is the best coach in the women's game and yes recruiting is a part of coaching but a lot of factors are a part of that and are not under the coaches control. There were probably no players on the field for SBU that UNC truly recruited .He takes some first team travel players, some second and third team travel players and makes them better players. Anyone with knowledge of the college game knows that if Spallina were the coach at UNC or Notre Dame etc he would already have a couple championships.
That said his antics are ridiculous and he coaches his team to be overly physical, found it interesting that a player he pushed to be at the US team tryouts barely plays for his team.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Who has legit shot at Final Four?

1 - North Carolina... Obviously ;-)

2 - Northwestern... will put up big #’s . Not sure about D.

3 - Maryland... not ready to count The Terps out.

4 - Syracuse... ? Let’s see how they do vs SBU.

5 - Notre Dame.... have they ever made it to Final Four?

6 - Florida... certainly in the mix.

7 - Loyola... would like to see it.

8 - Stony Brook... Syracuse game will be telling.

Anyone else?

Virginia? Boston College? JMU? Navy? Penn State?

Looking back over the past five seasons (excluding 2020) the following teams are the only ones that seem to be in the running.

Final 8 over the past 5 years:

5X - Maryland
5X - North Carolina

3X - Boston College
3X - Syracuse
3X - Princeton
3X - Penn State
3X - Northwestern

2X - Navy
2X - USC
2X - Stony Brook

1X - JMU
1X - Florida
1X - Loyola
1X - Virginia
1X - Penn
1X - UMass
1X - Denver
1X - Notre Dame
1X - Duke

Going out on limb.... UNC, MD, Syracuse and Northwestern in The Final Four.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What a bunch of nonsense. Spallina is the best coach in the women's game and yes recruiting is a part of coaching but a lot of factors are a part of that and are not under the coaches control. There were probably no players on the field for SBU that UNC truly recruited .He takes some first team travel players, some second and third team travel players and makes them better players. Anyone with knowledge of the college game knows that if Spallina were the coach at UNC or Notre Dame etc he would already have a couple championships.
That said his antics are ridiculous and he coaches his team to be overly physical, found it interesting that a player he pushed to be at the US team tryouts barely plays for his team.

He has done a good job but stop with if he were.... His record has been greatly inflated due to the conference. He has done a good job improving the out of conference schedule. He has had some wins over traditional powers but not when they were at the top of their game and he has not done it in The Tournament.
Agree, he is a very good coach but there has been way too much hype...

JMU Coach... National Championship.

Navy Coach... 2X Final Four.

They both did it without bring in all the Under Armour AA's.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What a bunch of nonsense. Spallina is the best coach in the women's game and yes recruiting is a part of coaching but a lot of factors are a part of that and are not under the coaches control. There were probably no players on the field for SBU that UNC truly recruited .He takes some first team travel players, some second and third team travel players and makes them better players. Anyone with knowledge of the college game knows that if Spallina were the coach at UNC or Notre Dame etc he would already have a couple championships.
That said his antics are ridiculous and he coaches his team to be overly physical, found it interesting that a player he pushed to be at the US team tryouts barely plays for his team.

Agreed also think all these freshman should red shirt losing so much time and jumping into college is unfair

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What a bunch of nonsense. Spallina is the best coach in the women's game and yes recruiting is a part of coaching but a lot of factors are a part of that and are not under the coaches control. There were probably no players on the field for SBU that UNC truly recruited .He takes some first team travel players, some second and third team travel players and makes them better players. Anyone with knowledge of the college game knows that if Spallina were the coach at UNC or Notre Dame etc he would already have a couple championships.
That said his antics are ridiculous and he coaches his team to be overly physical, found it interesting that a player he pushed to be at the US team tryouts barely plays for his team.

Agreed also think all these freshman should red shirt losing so much time and jumping into college is unfair

Redshirting is not as simple as it sounds... Coaches and players have to make hard decisions. This is not D1 Football. 12 scholarships "max" per team. If a current senior who has a scholarship wants to come back next year, the coach has to agree to offer the scholarship which means an incoming freshmen or underclass player who was told they will receive $$ could be out of luck.

This year the NCAA is allowing programs to offer more than the NCAA limit but that is only if the institution is willing to fund the additional scholarships. I'm sure the Big Time (ACC, BIG 10 and maybe the PAC12) funded this year but not sure about other conferences.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Who has legit shot at Final Four?

1 - North Carolina... Obviously ;-)

2 - Northwestern... will put up big #’s . Not sure about D.

3 - Maryland... not ready to count The Terps out.

4 - Syracuse... ? Let’s see how they do vs SBU.

5 - Notre Dame.... have they ever made it to Final Four?

6 - Florida... certainly in the mix.

7 - Loyola... would like to see it.

8 - Stony Brook... Syracuse game will be telling.

Anyone else?

Virginia? Boston College? JMU? Navy? Penn State?

Looking back over the past five seasons (excluding 2020) the following teams are the only ones that seem to be in the running.

Final 8 over the past 5 years:

5X - Maryland
5X - North Carolina

3X - Boston College
3X - Syracuse
3X - Princeton
3X - Penn State
3X - Northwestern

2X - Navy
2X - USC
2X - Stony Brook

1X - JMU
1X - Florida
1X - Loyola
1X - Virginia
1X - Penn
1X - UMass
1X - Denver
1X - Notre Dame
1X - Duke

Going out on limb.... UNC, MD, Syracuse and Northwestern in The Final Four.

Which one does your daughter play for?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Who has legit shot at Final Four?

1 - North Carolina... Obviously ;-)

2 - Northwestern... will put up big #’s . Not sure about D.

3 - Maryland... not ready to count The Terps out.

4 - Syracuse... ? Let’s see how they do vs SBU.

5 - Notre Dame.... have they ever made it to Final Four?

6 - Florida... certainly in the mix.

7 - Loyola... would like to see it.

8 - Stony Brook... Syracuse game will be telling.

Anyone else?

Virginia? Boston College? JMU? Navy? Penn State?

Looking back over the past five seasons (excluding 2020) the following teams are the only ones that seem to be in the running.

Final 8 over the past 5 years:

5X - Maryland
5X - North Carolina

3X - Boston College
3X - Syracuse
3X - Princeton
3X - Penn State
3X - Northwestern

2X - Navy
2X - USC
2X - Stony Brook

1X - JMU
1X - Florida
1X - Loyola
1X - Virginia
1X - Penn
1X - UMass
1X - Denver
1X - Notre Dame
1X - Duke

Going out on limb.... UNC, MD, Syracuse and Northwestern in The Final Four.

Which one does your daughter play for?

I guess some on here can only make snide comments. They just can't help themselves they are toxic, always tearing down a player, team, coach etc... some can't hold a discussion about the sport.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Who has legit shot at Final Four?

1 - North Carolina... Obviously ;-)

2 - Northwestern... will put up big #’s . Not sure about D.

3 - Maryland... not ready to count The Terps out.

4 - Syracuse... ? Let’s see how they do vs SBU.

5 - Notre Dame.... have they ever made it to Final Four?

6 - Florida... certainly in the mix.

7 - Loyola... would like to see it.

8 - Stony Brook... Syracuse game will be telling.

Anyone else?

Virginia? Boston College? JMU? Navy? Penn State?

Looking back over the past five seasons (excluding 2020) the following teams are the only ones that seem to be in the running.

Final 8 over the past 5 years:

5X - Maryland
5X - North Carolina

3X - Boston College
3X - Syracuse
3X - Princeton
3X - Penn State
3X - Northwestern

2X - Navy
2X - USC
2X - Stony Brook

1X - JMU
1X - Florida
1X - Loyola
1X - Virginia
1X - Penn
1X - UMass
1X - Denver
1X - Notre Dame
1X - Duke

Going out on limb.... UNC, MD, Syracuse and Northwestern in The Final Four.

Which one does your daughter play for?

I guess some on here can only make snide comments. They just can't help themselves they are toxic, always tearing down a player, team, coach etc... some can't hold a discussion about the sport.

Why not just answer the question? Am I wrong?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Who has legit shot at Final Four?

1 - North Carolina... Obviously ;-)

2 - Northwestern... will put up big #’s . Not sure about D.

3 - Maryland... not ready to count The Terps out.

4 - Syracuse... ? Let’s see how they do vs SBU.

5 - Notre Dame.... have they ever made it to Final Four?

6 - Florida... certainly in the mix.

7 - Loyola... would like to see it.

8 - Stony Brook... Syracuse game will be telling.

Anyone else?

Virginia? Boston College? JMU? Navy? Penn State?

Looking back over the past five seasons (excluding 2020) the following teams are the only ones that seem to be in the running.

Final 8 over the past 5 years:

5X - Maryland
5X - North Carolina

3X - Boston College
3X - Syracuse
3X - Princeton
3X - Penn State
3X - Northwestern

2X - Navy
2X - USC
2X - Stony Brook

1X - JMU
1X - Florida
1X - Loyola
1X - Virginia
1X - Penn
1X - UMass
1X - Denver
1X - Notre Dame
1X - Duke

Going out on limb.... UNC, MD, Syracuse and Northwestern in The Final Four.

Which one does your daughter play for?

I guess some on here can only make snide comments. They just can't help themselves they are toxic, always tearing down a player, team, coach etc... some can't hold a discussion about the sport.

Why not just answer the question? Am I wrong?

Different poster here but who cares if they have a daughter on one of those teams . The guy is trying to start a conversation and you have to be a flaccid lost .
I will go UNC , SBU , ND , Loyola

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Who has legit shot at Final Four?

1 - North Carolina... Obviously ;-)

2 - Northwestern... will put up big #’s . Not sure about D.

3 - Maryland... not ready to count The Terps out.

4 - Syracuse... ? Let’s see how they do vs SBU.

5 - Notre Dame.... have they ever made it to Final Four?

6 - Florida... certainly in the mix.

7 - Loyola... would like to see it.

8 - Stony Brook... Syracuse game will be telling.

Anyone else?

Virginia? Boston College? JMU? Navy? Penn State?

Looking back over the past five seasons (excluding 2020) the following teams are the only ones that seem to be in the running.

Final 8 over the past 5 years:

5X - Maryland
5X - North Carolina

3X - Boston College
3X - Syracuse
3X - Princeton
3X - Penn State
3X - Northwestern

2X - Navy
2X - USC
2X - Stony Brook

1X - JMU
1X - Florida
1X - Loyola
1X - Virginia
1X - Penn
1X - UMass
1X - Denver
1X - Notre Dame
1X - Duke

Going out on limb.... UNC, MD, Syracuse and Northwestern in The Final Four.

Which one does your daughter play for?

I guess some on here can only make snide comments. They just can't help themselves they are toxic, always tearing down a player, team, coach etc... some can't hold a discussion about the sport.

Why not just answer the question? Am I wrong?

Not the original poster but why do you care which team their daughter plays for? I guarantee my daughters team will not be playing in the final four and it is doubtful they will be in the tournament but I am still interested in who will be in it. No one discusses who will finish the season not ranked in the top 20 with an RPI of 45.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Who has legit shot at Final Four?

1 - North Carolina... Obviously ;-)

2 - Northwestern... will put up big #’s . Not sure about D.

3 - Maryland... not ready to count The Terps out.

4 - Syracuse... ? Let’s see how they do vs SBU.

5 - Notre Dame.... have they ever made it to Final Four?

6 - Florida... certainly in the mix.

7 - Loyola... would like to see it.

8 - Stony Brook... Syracuse game will be telling.

Anyone else?

Virginia? Boston College? JMU? Navy? Penn State?

Looking back over the past five seasons (excluding 2020) the following teams are the only ones that seem to be in the running.

Final 8 over the past 5 years:

5X - Maryland
5X - North Carolina

3X - Boston College
3X - Syracuse
3X - Princeton
3X - Penn State
3X - Northwestern

2X - Navy
2X - USC
2X - Stony Brook

1X - JMU
1X - Florida
1X - Loyola
1X - Virginia
1X - Penn
1X - UMass
1X - Denver
1X - Notre Dame
1X - Duke

Going out on limb.... UNC, MD, Syracuse and Northwestern in The Final Four.

Which one does your daughter play for?

I guess some on here can only make snide comments. They just can't help themselves they are toxic, always tearing down a player, team, coach etc... some can't hold a discussion about the sport.

Why not just answer the question? Am I wrong?

Different poster here but who cares if they have a daughter on one of those teams . The guy is trying to start a conversation and you have to be a flaccid lost .
I will go UNC , SBU , ND , Loyola

Would love to see it but I will not bet against MD. Not sure ND can get there. Florida? Penn State? Virginia?

Syracuse vs Stony Brook should be a great game.

Would love to see a non perennial Top 15-20 Team break into the mix. Who has a shot? Denver, Richmond, Michigan, Stanford?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Who has legit shot at Final Four?

1 - North Carolina... Obviously ;-)

2 - Northwestern... will put up big #’s . Not sure about D.

3 - Maryland... not ready to count The Terps out.

4 - Syracuse... ? Let’s see how they do vs SBU.

5 - Notre Dame.... have they ever made it to Final Four?

6 - Florida... certainly in the mix.

7 - Loyola... would like to see it.

8 - Stony Brook... Syracuse game will be telling.

Anyone else?

Virginia? Boston College? JMU? Navy? Penn State?

Looking back over the past five seasons (excluding 2020) the following teams are the only ones that seem to be in the running.

Final 8 over the past 5 years:

5X - Maryland
5X - North Carolina

3X - Boston College
3X - Syracuse
3X - Princeton
3X - Penn State
3X - Northwestern

2X - Navy
2X - USC
2X - Stony Brook

1X - JMU
1X - Florida
1X - Loyola
1X - Virginia
1X - Penn
1X - UMass
1X - Denver
1X - Notre Dame
1X - Duke

Going out on limb.... UNC, MD, Syracuse and Northwestern in The Final Four.

Which one does your daughter play for?

I guess some on here can only make snide comments. They just can't help themselves they are toxic, always tearing down a player, team, coach etc... some can't hold a discussion about the sport.

Why not just answer the question? Am I wrong?

Just a guess but probably because they view your question as ridiculous and snarky.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple observations from the UNC/SB game:
SB out of their league. Too many turnovers and some thug play there. Kennedy a beast, not sure about her being the best player though.
UNC was all around good, but the a couple of the highly touted superstars did nothing. Such as the big graduate transfer and number one freshman who’s only stat was a yellow.
Overall a pretty boring game

SB overrated freshman did nothing either!! JS overrates his players but the truth comes out when games are played!

The bitterness never ends... What is the matter with you people. Still jealous that these players receive more attention and recognition than your daughter? As far as I know, players do not rank or rate themselves so I never understand why small minded bitter parents come on here and try to tear the players down.

19 UNC players saw playing time vs SBU, 14 of the 19 were Under Armour All-Americans. I believe at least 17 of 19 were Ranked in the Top 50 by Inside Lacrosse coming out of HS. UNC has all 12 starters back from last season with a number of returning All-Americans. The fact that the "big transfer" stepped right into the starting lineup speaks volumes as to her ability. For a freshmen to even get playing time is also very impressive. Just about all of the UNC players who saw action were highly touted coming out of HS and it looks like they are living up to they hype.

Stony Brook is also a very good team with a fair share of AA caliber players so for their freshmen to get playing time against UNC is also impressive.

Any player who starts and or plays a regular roll on a Top 10 caliber team is an excellent player. As a matter of fact, there are many players at Top Programs who rarely see the field who would walk right in and start at Teams outside the Top 10 - 15.

So keep on hating and telling yourself that your daughter is better and should have received more recognition.

Lol, ran around the field doing nothing. Freshman on other teams putting up big points! If you’re an attacker on the field significant minutes and don’t score a goal or get an assist. You’re not a top player, sorry!

What other freshman put up “big” points in games that weren’t mismatched complete blow outs?

I originally had ND going to the final 4 but will now replace them with NW. I get ND plays a difficult conference schedule ( not by choice) but I prefer teams that choose to challenge themselves not run up their stats . They do not have 1 difficult elective game .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I originally had ND going to the final 4 but will now replace them with NW. I get ND plays a difficult conference schedule ( not by choice) but I prefer teams that choose to challenge themselves not run up their stats . They do not have 1 difficult elective game .

It’s kinda tough to punish any team because of their scheduled this year, travel restrictions and avoiding hotels etc had a big impact on them. ND was pretty good last year, no reason to think they slipped much.

I’ll go with UNC, Syracuse, ND, Loyola... with prize going to UNC

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Would love to see a non perennial Top 15-20 Team break into the mix. Who has a shot? Denver, Richmond, Michigan, Stanford?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Would love to see a non perennial Top 15-20 Team break into the mix. Who has a shot? Denver, Richmond, Michigan, Stanford?

Richmond?
Please
Radford scored 10 goals on them

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I originally had ND going to the final 4 but will now replace them with NW. I get ND plays a difficult conference schedule ( not by choice) but I prefer teams that choose to challenge themselves not run up their stats . They do not have 1 difficult elective game .

It’s kinda tough to punish any team because of their scheduled this year, travel restrictions and avoiding hotels etc had a big impact on them. ND was pretty good last year, no reason to think they slipped much.

I’ll go with UNC, Syracuse, ND, Loyola... with prize going to UNC

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I originally had ND going to the final 4 but will now replace them with NW. I get ND plays a difficult conference schedule ( not by choice) but I prefer teams that choose to challenge themselves not run up their stats . They do not have 1 difficult elective game .

It’s kinda tough to punish any team because of their scheduled this year, travel restrictions and avoiding hotels etc had a big impact on them. ND was pretty good last year, no reason to think they slipped much.

I’ll go with UNC, Syracuse, ND, Loyola... with prize going to UNC

UNC will not win. They are overrated. Same with Duke on Men’s side. I’ll be right on both.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Would love to see a non perennial Top 15-20 Team break into the mix. Who has a shot? Denver, Richmond, Michigan, Stanford?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Would love to see a non perennial Top 15-20 Team break into the mix. Who has a shot? Denver, Richmond, Michigan, Stanford?

Richmond?
Please
Radford scored 10 goals on them

Richmond is a solid team. They found a way to beat Virginia last year (UVA ranked 6 at the time). The program is on the rise and they should definitely be Top 20. Can they find a way to knock someone off in the tournament? Only time will tell but I think they have as good of a chance as any other non-perennial to surprise.

I think the Syracuse v Loyola game will be a good read on those two teams, then Syracuse v Stoney Brook right after.

The one thing I point out is SU had no issue with NW. ND and UNC both struggled with NW.

UNC has FL and Duke in next couple of weeks.

ND nobody for next two weeks

So I think even know it is early in season we will get some idea on top 4 quickly.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think the Syracuse v Loyola game will be a good read on those two teams, then Syracuse v Stoney Brook right after.

The one thing I point out is SU had no issue with NW. ND and UNC both struggled with NW.

UNC has FL and Duke in next couple of weeks.

ND nobody for next two weeks

So I think even know it is early in season we will get some idea on top 4 quickly.

Apparently the Ivy's are officially out for 2021. That means 2 possibly 3 Tournament spots (Princeton, Penn & Dartmouth) will now open up for other schools. Which teams will be able to take advantage? Will it be additional ACC or Big 10 teams or will some other programs be able to capitalize on the absence of the Ivy's?

Every year people say watch out for this team or that team but in the end its usually the same teams year after year. The level of play falls off a cliff outside the top 20. Then there is a big difference from 10-20.

And as far as Spallina, guy is impossible to root for. Cocky, overly physical, coaches to bend rules or take liberties, BUT guy gets more with less than any other coach in the country. If he was at Florida or ND during their strong years he would have won a couple of Naty's, those coaches couldnt coach up great teams when they needed coaching in the tournament

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think the Syracuse v Loyola game will be a good read on those two teams, then Syracuse v Stoney Brook right after.

The one thing I point out is SU had no issue with NW. ND and UNC both struggled with NW.

UNC has FL and Duke in next couple of weeks.

ND nobody for next two weeks

So I think even know it is early in season we will get some idea on top 4 quickly.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think the Syracuse v Loyola game will be
a good read on those two teams, then Syracuse v Stoney Brook right after.

The one thing I point out is SU had no issue with NW. ND and UNC both struggled with NW.

UNC has FL and Duke in next couple of weeks.

ND nobody for next two weeks

So I think even know it is early in season we will get some idea on top 4 quickly.

Up by 2 with under 3 minutes to play is not exactly no problem for Cuse over NW , as a matter of fact UNC was up by 2 with almost the same exact time remains over NW . Yes Cuse is good but a couple of stat padding goals late in the NW game is not overly impressive especially after losing to SBU . Duke has not looked good so far .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Every year people say watch out for this team or that team but in the end its usually the same teams year after year. The level of play falls off a cliff outside the top 20. Then there is a big difference from 10-20.

And as far as Spallina, guy is impossible to root for. Cocky, overly physical, coaches to bend rules or take liberties, BUT guy gets more with less than any other coach in the country. If he was at Florida or ND during their strong years he would have won a couple of Naty's, those coaches couldnt coach up great teams when they needed coaching in the tournament

I do not completely agree. In recent years there has only been one team that has been there in the end (Final Four) every year and that would be The Maryland Terrapins. 20 Teams have finished the season ranked in the Top 10 over the past five seasons 2015 - 2019. Nine different teams have made it to the Final Four and three different teams have won The National Championship.

Maryland - 5X Top 10 Finish, 5X Final Four, 3X National Championship.
UNC - 5X Top 10 Finish, 4X Final Four, 1X National Championship.

BC - 4X Top 10 Finish, 3X Final Four.
Syracuse - 4X Top 10 Finish, 2X Final Four.
Princeton - 4X Top 10 Finish.

Penn State - 3X Top 10 Finish, 2X Final Four.
Stony Brook - 3X Top 10 Finish.
Florida - 3X Top 10 Finish.

Navy - 2X Top 10 Finish, 1X Final Four.
Northwestern - 2X Top 10 Finish, 1X Final Four.
Loyola - 2X Top 10 Finish.
USC - 2X Top 10 Finish.
Virginia - 2X Top 10 Finish
Notre Dame - 2X Top 10 Finish

JMU - 1X Top 10 Finish, 1X Final Four, 1X National Championship.
Penn - 1X Top 10 Finish.
Duke - 1X Top 10 Finish.
Stanford - 1X Top 10 Finish.
Towson - 1 X Top 10 Finish.
Denver - 1X Top 10 Finish.

I will take UNC and Maryland every year, you can have the rest of the field

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Every year people say watch out for this team or that team but in the end its usually the same teams year after year. The level of play falls off a cliff outside the top 20. Then there is a big difference from 10-20.

And as far as Spallina, guy is impossible to root for. Cocky, overly physical, coaches to bend rules or take liberties, BUT guy gets more with less than any other coach in the country. If he was at Florida or ND during their strong years he would have won a couple of Naty's, those coaches couldnt coach up great teams when they needed coaching in the tournament

I do not completely agree. In recent years there has only been one team that has been there in the end (Final Four) every year and that would be The Maryland Terrapins. 20 Teams have finished the season ranked in the Top 10 over the past five seasons 2015 - 2019. Nine different teams have made it to the Final Four and three different teams have won The National Championship.

Maryland - 5X Top 10 Finish, 5X Final Four, 3X National Championship.
UNC - 5X Top 10 Finish, 4X Final Four, 1X National Championship.

BC - 4X Top 10 Finish, 3X Final Four.
Syracuse - 4X Top 10 Finish, 2X Final Four.
Princeton - 4X Top 10 Finish.

Penn State - 3X Top 10 Finish, 2X Final Four.
Stony Brook - 3X Top 10 Finish.
Florida - 3X Top 10 Finish.

Navy - 2X Top 10 Finish, 1X Final Four.
Northwestern - 2X Top 10 Finish, 1X Final Four.
Loyola - 2X Top 10 Finish.
USC - 2X Top 10 Finish.
Virginia - 2X Top 10 Finish
Notre Dame - 2X Top 10 Finish

JMU - 1X Top 10 Finish, 1X Final Four, 1X National Championship.
Penn - 1X Top 10 Finish.
Duke - 1X Top 10 Finish.
Stanford - 1X Top 10 Finish.
Towson - 1 X Top 10 Finish.
Denver - 1X Top 10 Finish.

Obviously UNC will be tough to beat, goalie is terrific, team
Defense is excellent, defense and midfielders are extremely athletic and fast , offense is smart and plays with confidence and poise , very unselfish and well coached.

The just held to very good teams to 7 and 5 goals! Not going to lose any game if they keep opponents under 10 goals.

Their offense gets the hype but this team is built from back to front with tremendous speed on the defensive side. In close games that will allow for momentum and game Changing transitions / fast breaks to an attack that can finish as well as anyone.

Northwestern will put up numbers but not sure how their D will be.

Stony Brook is solid but like NU they may have to put up big numbers in order to win.

Can’t wait to watch Syracuse.

Maryland?? Just can’t bring myself to count them out.

Many unfamiliar faces at BC... time will tell.

Loyola will be tough, well balanced , slick and smart. Are they athletic / fast enough to hang with the best?

Virginia looked ok but don’t think they are final 8.

No Idea how Navy will be. Same for USC... we will know soon enough.

Penn State Freshmen getting a lot of hype... with some teams loaded with 5th year seniors it’s going to be tough for freshmen to do the heavy lifting.

Notre Dame? What will make this year different?

Florida? Very good in the goal. D is solid. laxplayer is very good. I will not count them out...

Stanford is supposed to be tough. IdK.

Duke....???? What has happened to them? Don’t think they will finish Top 10.

JMU, always solid. Can they find the magic again?

Towson , another solid program but not sure they will compete with top teams this year.

Denver? Don’t know much about them.

Anyone else out there? Georgetown, Michigan, Hofstra, UMass, Hopkins??? Anyone?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just don't see Notre Dame or Loyola being better than Stony Brook, Maryland or Northwestern

Must not of watched much lax last year..

Pretty sure that nobody watched much lax last year...

Both ND and Loyola will be very good (as will Northwestern, Stony Brook and Maryland)

In the end, it will all come down to overall Team Defense and goalie play as it always does...

Good luck to all!

Loyola? Did not look like Top Tier Team Today.

As I noted earlier Cuse is the team to beat. Many experience 5th years and seniors. But I was shocked at Loyola lack of 1v1 defense, and overall stick handling.

Hawrsychuk is the best player this year ( was last year also) doesn’t mean she’ll win the tewaaraton but she should.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

As I noted earlier Cuse is the team to beat. Many experience 5th years and seniors. But I was shocked at Loyola lack of 1v1 defense, and overall stick handling.

Please , other than a Loyolla team that looked like they have not played or practiced in 11 months it’s been a long time since Cuse has beaten a top 5 team . Calling them the team to beat seems like maybe wait till they beat an actual top 5 team .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Hawrsychuk is the best player this year ( was last year also) doesn’t mean she’ll win the tewaaraton but she should.

Teams rarely face guard her or really double team her. Season just started - lets see how it plays out. Might be a defender this year!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

As I noted earlier Cuse is the team to beat. Many experience 5th years and seniors. But I was shocked at Loyola lack of 1v1 defense, and overall stick handling.

Please , other than a Loyolla team that looked like they have not played or practiced in 11 months it’s been a long time since Cuse has beaten a top 5 team . Calling them the team to beat seems like maybe wait till they beat an actual top 5 team .

Pretty sure Syracuse made it to the Final Four in 2017 which technically one of the last 3 Final Fours... I would say they are in elite company.

Syracuse Zone defense and others are in three seconds for 5 through 8 seconds at a time. This is how a good zone D becomes a great zone D when refs do not enforce three seconds in the 8M. It was ridiculous today. Also Loyola was pushed back to free position shots when they caught ball in tight. Smart strategy to jump the shooter and foul them at 3m and push them back to 8M.

If refs called three seconds the zone becomes much less comfortable to execute

Originally Posted by Anonymous

As I noted earlier Cuse is the team to beat. Many experience 5th years and seniors. But I was shocked at Loyola lack of 1v1 defense, and overall stick handling.

Please , other than a Loyolla team that looked like they have not played or practiced in 11 months it’s been a long time since Cuse has beaten a top 5 team . Calling them the team to beat seems like maybe wait till they beat an actual top 5 team .

Pretty sure Syracuse made it to the Final Four in 2017 which technically one of the last 3 Final Fours... I would say they are in elite company.

Seriously your basing they are the team to beat on their final four appearance in 2017 . A few things about that , that’s sad , they did not make final four as they got blown out by BC earlier than that , I would ask when was the last time they won the ACC or made the final four but you would just make up more nonsense . They are a good team with a legit chance this year but until someone beats UNC they are the team to beat as I think they have earned it by winning the ACC the last several years , making the actual final four the last 2 , bringing back virtually all their starters and adding a stud 5th year transfer or 2 and adding a top ranked freshman class .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse Zone defense and others are in three seconds for 5 through 8 seconds at a time. This is how a good zone D becomes a great zone D when refs do not enforce three seconds in the 8M. It was ridiculous today. Also Loyola was pushed back to free position shots when they caught ball in tight. Smart strategy to jump the shooter and foul them at 3m and push them back to 8M.

If refs called three seconds the zone becomes much less comfortable to execute

Completely agree, officials refuse to enforce 3 seconds. It’s become a joke. Love the teams that have confidence in their Athletes and play man to man. Well coached teams that can execute their offensive strategy will beat a zone every time. When teams cheat and violate the 3 second rule repeatedly and intentionally the zone becomes more difficult to break. Good coaches will still beat the “cheating zone” if their offensive scheme is sound and their players are disciplined and smart.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

As I noted earlier Cuse is the team to beat. Many experience 5th years and seniors. But I was shocked at Loyola lack of 1v1 defense, and overall stick handling.

Please , other than a Loyolla team that looked like they have not played or practiced in 11 months it’s been a long time since Cuse has beaten a top 5 team . Calling them the team to beat seems like maybe wait till they beat an actual top 5 team .

Pretty sure Syracuse made it to the Final Four in 2017 which technically one of the last 3 Final Fours... I would say they are in elite company.

Seriously your basing they are the team to beat on their final four appearance in 2017 . A few things about that , that’s sad , they did not make final four as they got blown out by BC earlier than that , I would ask when was the last time they won the ACC or made the final four but you would just make up more nonsense . They are a good team with a legit chance this year but until someone beats UNC they are the team to beat as I think they have earned it by winning the ACC the last several years , making the actual final four the last 2 , bringing back virtually all their starters and adding a stud 5th year transfer or 2 and adding a top ranked freshman class .

Sorry, not the one saying Syracuse is the team to beat. Just believe they are an excellent team this year and certainly one of the Top 8 - 10 Programs. Also, my mistake, Syracuse did not reach The Final Four in 2017. However, they did advance to The Final Four in 2015 and 2016 that’s two of the past four final fours. Once again they are in elite company.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

As I noted earlier Cuse is the team to beat. Many experience 5th years and seniors. But I was shocked at Loyola lack of 1v1 defense, and overall stick handling.

Please , other than a Loyolla team that looked like they have not played or practiced in 11 months it’s been a long time since Cuse has beaten a top 5 team . Calling them the team to beat seems like maybe wait till they beat an actual top 5 team .

Pretty sure Syracuse made it to the Final Four in 2017 which technically one of the last 3 Final Fours... I would say they are in elite company.

Seriously your basing they are the team to beat on their final four appearance in 2017 . A few things about that , that’s sad , they did not make final four as they got blown out by BC earlier than that , I would ask when was the last time they won the ACC or made the final four but you would just make up more nonsense . They are a good team with a legit chance this year but until someone beats UNC they are the team to beat as I think they have earned it by winning the ACC the last several years , making the actual final four the last 2 , bringing back virtually all their starters and adding a stud 5th year transfer or 2 and adding a top ranked freshman class .

Sorry, not the one saying Syracuse is the team to beat. Just believe they are an excellent team this year and certainly one of the Top 8 - 10 Programs. Also, my mistake, Syracuse did not reach The Final Four in 2017. However, they did advance to The Final Four in 2015 and 2016 that’s two of the past four final fours. Once again they are in elite company.

Wouldn’t that be 2 of the last 5 . Again basing the team to beat on a final four 5 years ago seems odd

Originally Posted by Anonymous

As I noted earlier Cuse is the team to beat. Many experience 5th years and seniors. But I was shocked at Loyola lack of 1v1 defense, and overall stick handling.

Please , other than a Loyolla team that looked like they have not played or practiced in 11 months it’s been a long time since Cuse has beaten a top 5 team . Calling them the team to beat seems like maybe wait till they beat an actual top 5 team .

Pretty sure Syracuse made it to the Final Four in 2017 which technically one of the last 3 Final Fours... I would say they are in elite company.

Seriously your basing they are the team to beat on their final four appearance in 2017 . A few things about that , that’s sad , they did not make final four as they got blown out by BC earlier than that , I would ask when was the last time they won the ACC or made the final four but you would just make up more nonsense . They are a good team with a legit chance this year but until someone beats UNC they are the team to beat as I think they have earned it by winning the ACC the last several years , making the actual final four the last 2 , bringing back virtually all their starters and adding a stud 5th year transfer or 2 and adding a top ranked freshman class .

Sorry, not the one saying Syracuse is the team to beat. Just believe they are an excellent team this year and certainly one of the Top 8 - 10 Programs. Also, my mistake, Syracuse did not reach The Final Four in 2017. However, they did advance to The Final Four in 2015 and 2016 that’s two of the past four final fours. Once again they are in elite company.

Wouldn’t that be 2 of the last 5 . Again basing the team to beat on a final four 5 years ago seems odd

Again, I’m not the one saying that Syracuse is the team to beat but they are definitely one of the Top Programs. Two trips to the Final Four is pretty darn good, probably better than all but two or three programs. Only time will tell but Syracuse should be very good this year and they are one of the teams with legit shot at Final Four. Other teams with legit shot IMHO are:
- North Carolina
- Northwestern
- Stony Brook
Not sure who else... MD, PSU, Virginia, Florida??
I do not think Notre Dame will be there in the end.

The flopping in women’s lacrosse makes the game unwatchable . I thought it was supposed to be a point of emphasis this year for the refs .

The cup is UNC’s to lose... they’re the best team this year (and were last year too) that said the “best” team doesn’t always win.. Syracuse is special this year as is NW and ND... Penn State will go as far as their frosh middies can take them but it won’t be to a final. The terps will be good but not great no final 4 for them this year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The cup is UNC’s to lose... they’re the best team this year (and were last year too) that said the “best” team doesn’t always win.. Syracuse is special this year as is NW and ND... Penn State will go as far as their frosh middies can take them but it won’t be to a final. The terps will be good but not great no final 4 for them this year.

Agree with the exception of ND...

I agree with the above post. UNC has the most talent on the field. However, Syracuse and ND and it only been one game seem to move the ball to much better. Cuse plays SB this weekend so we will see if this happens again. ND not sure when protocol ends. NW, we will no nothing until they play PSU and MD.PSU playing second game helped them v MD.

Team play and great goaltending will win at the end.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I agree with the above post. UNC has the most talent on the field. However, Syracuse and ND and it only been one game seem to move the ball to much better. Cuse plays SB this weekend so we will see if this happens again. ND not sure when protocol ends. NW, we will no nothing until they play PSU and MD.PSU playing second game helped them v MD.

Team play and great goaltending will win at the end.

Carolina, Carolina, Carolina... Lets see, they have 4 of the past 5 Inside Lacrosse #1 ranked recruits and I am guessing more Under Armour All-Americans and Inside Lacrosse Top 40 - 50 recruits than any other program (maybe not Maryland IDK), all of their starters are back from 2020 (several that are already DI All-Americans) a stud 5th transfer and the top rated freshman in the country. They have an excellent goalie, they are fast and athletic on defense and at the midfield, they have some great finishers and they are well coached. My guess is that they are deeper than any other team as well.

Does anyone have the chemistry to beat them? I don't think anyone is more athletic or as well balanced. Is there a JMU hiding out there? Holding two quality teams 5 and 7 goals is very impressive, if they keep that up nobody will touch them.

This Carolina Team reminds me of the 2019 Maryland Team. Like Maryland, UNC has an excellent goalie, is fast and athletic, plays great man to man defense and is loaded with Seniors / 5th year starters... I think 9.

I am going with Northwestern and Syracuse as the teams with the best chance of beating them. I know Notre Dame is getting a lot of hype but until I see The Irish beat a Top Tier team I will hold off. I watched the MD vs PSU game and both teams are solid but not sure they are Top 5. Who will emerge?

During the Duke vs Virginia Tech game the announcers were discussing the opportunities for some other programs to make the NCAA Tournament with The Ivy League not participating. Most years The Ivy's send two (Princeton & Penn) sometimes three teams to the tournament. Safe to say there will be at least two openings possibly three as Dartmouth has been pretty tough the past few years. Each year there are competitive teams on the bubble who come up just short, which teams will benefit the most from the absence of the top Ivy's?

UNC is the favorite until someone beats them . That said they seem vulnerable . Their defense and goal play has been outstanding so far this year but the same exact group looked not good in their final game last season against the fast paced NW .The offense looks very different this year and seems a bit lost , is it the loss of Dowd as they have never won the whole thing without her, is it the defenses they are playing against (they scored a bunch against HPU but it was ugly run to goal to get my points) ,is it chemistry, is it offense takes longer to come together after the long layoff or a combination of those things. Time will tell but Cuse looked very strong , weak at the draw to start but made adjustments in the second half at the draw and it showed. Will be some great ACC games this year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The cup is UNC’s to lose... they’re the best team this year (and were last year too) that said the “best” team doesn’t always win.. Syracuse is special this year as is NW and ND... Penn State will go as far as their frosh middies can take them but it won’t be to a final. The terps will be good but not great no final 4 for them this year.

The Terps showed last year that they took a huge step back, and should be ranked on the lower half of the top 20 at this point. Good for Penn State, they got the massive benefit in the polls by beating a way over ranked MD (never seen a jump like that before, especially on a win on a spiraling team). Probably neither should be top 10. Loyola loses to a very good Cuse, a game they are supposed to lose and free falls in the polls? And many teams who did not play at all, somehow lose and gain position. At one point I thought the "experts" did a great job with these polls, I am starting to think these polls are about as good as what you and I could come up with.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The cup is UNC’s to lose... they’re the best team this year (and were last year too) that said the “best” team doesn’t always win.. Syracuse is special this year as is NW and ND... Penn State will go as far as their frosh middies can take them but it won’t be to a final. The terps will be good but not great no final 4 for them this year.

The Terps showed last year that they took a huge step back, and should be ranked on the lower half of the top 20 at this point. Good for Penn State, they got the massive benefit in the polls by beating a way over ranked MD (never seen a jump like that before, especially on a win on a spiraling team). Probably neither should be top 10. Loyola loses to a very good Cuse, a game they are supposed to lose and free falls in the polls? And many teams who did not play at all, somehow lose and gain position. At one point I thought the "experts" did a great job with these polls, I am starting to think these polls are about as good as what you and I could come up with.

Loyola lost by 12 goals. To say that they lost to a team that they were supposed to lose to is a little misleading to say the least. I believe Loyola was ranked just one position below Syracuse in last weeks poll. Loyola was not competitive this week. That said, I think they will bounce back and be much more competitive as the season progresses. I would bet Loyola finishes the season in the 11 - 15 range. Maryland lost to a competitive Penn State Squad, I would not call them "spiraling" just yet. I believe Maryland graduated 8 or 9 starters from their 2019 team (a team that was dominant) so yes they are rebuilding but I am confident that they will be back in the Top 10 by seasons end. As for the polls / rankings I agree with you, you and I and any number of fans could do just as good a job.

Beautiful day for a game at Stony Brook.

Prediction...

Stony Brook 15 USC 10 with SBU putting a couple in late to pad it up...

SB looked very sharp. Score could have been much worse.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

SB looked very sharp. Score could have been much worse.

Did the superstar freshman do anything?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Beautiful day for a game at Stony Brook.

Prediction...

Stony Brook 15 USC 10 with SBU putting a couple in late to pad it up...

Joe actually pulled the plug on the horses, score could have been 25-3 had he let it go that way. You don't see him do that often, probably a kind gesture to say thanks for coming out to east coast to schedule a game against us. That being said, USC has a long way to go and might be headed in the wrong direction.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

SB looked very sharp. Score could have been much worse.

Did the superstar freshman do anything?

There was a freshman that scored a bunch

Originally Posted by Anonymous

SB looked very sharp. Score could have been much worse.

Did the superstar freshman do anything?

Take your bitterness and jealousy and slither back under the rock.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]As I noted earlier Cuse is the team to beat. Many experience 5th years and seniors. But I was shocked at Loyola lack of 1v1 defense, and overall stick handling.

Please , other than a Loyolla team that looked like they have not played or practiced in 11 months it’s been a long time since Cuse has beaten a top 5 team . Calling them the team to beat seems like maybe wait till they beat an actual top 5 team .[/quot

Seriously your basing they are the team to beat on their final four appearance in 2017 . A few things about that , that’s sad , they did not make final four as they got blown out by BC earlier than that , I would ask when was the last time they won the ACC or made the final four but you would just make up more nonsense . They are a good team with a legit chance this year but until someone beats UNC they are the team to beat as I think they have earned it by winning the ACC the last several years , making the actual final four the last 2 , bringing back virtually all their starters and adding a stud 5th year transfer or 2 and adding a top ranked freshman class .

Sorry, not the one saying Syracuse is the team to beat. Just believe they are an excellent team this year and certainly one of the Top 8 - 10 Programs. Also, my mistake, Syracuse did not reach The Final Four in 2017. However, they did advance to The Final Four in 2015 and 2016 that’s two of the past four final fours. Once again they are in elite company.

Wouldn’t that be 2 of the last 5 . Again basing the team to beat on a final four 5 years ago seems odd

Again, I’m not the one saying that Syracuse is the team to beat but they are definitely one of the Top Programs. Two trips to the Final Four is pretty darn good, probably better than all but two or three programs. Only time will tell but Syracuse should be very good this year and they are one of the teams with legit shot at Final Four. Other teams with legit shot IMHO are:
- North Carolina
- Northwestern
- Stony Brook
Not sure who else... MD, PSU, Virginia, Florida??
I do not think Notre Dame will be there in the end.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

SB looked very sharp. Score could have been much worse.

Did the superstar freshman do anything?

Yes 2 goals on 4 shots . Not bad , thanks for asking .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Beautiful day for a game at Stony Brook.

Prediction...

Stony Brook 15 USC 10 with SBU putting a couple in late to pad it up...

Joe actually pulled the plug on the horses, score could have been 25-3 had he let it go that way. You don't see him do that often, probably a kind gesture to say thanks for coming out to east coast to schedule a game against us. That being said, USC has a long way to go and might be headed in the wrong direction.

Stony Brook plays Syracuse in four days, that’s the main reason for resting players.

Can’t wait to watch that game, should be a good one.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

SB looked very sharp. Score could have been much worse.

Did the superstar freshman do anything?

Yes 2 goals on 4 shots . Not bad , thanks for asking .

Guess there must be more than one superstar freshman. The one I was asking about shows no points in the box score. Just looked. Nice job to the unexpected performance. Keep it up!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Beautiful day for a game at Stony Brook.

Prediction...

Stony Brook 15 USC 10 with SBU putting a couple in late to pad it up...

Joe actually pulled the plug on the horses, score could have been 25-3 had he let it go that way. You don't see him do that often, probably a kind gesture to say thanks for coming out to east coast to schedule a game against us. That being said, USC has a long way to go and might be headed in the wrong direction.

SBU parent of said horse in stable ... “Joe” pulled the plug 🙄😂

Originally Posted by Anonymous

SB looked very sharp. Score could have been much worse.

Did the superstar freshman do anything?

Yes 2 goals on 4 shots . Not bad , thanks for asking .

Would have expected more!

You mean ponies? The horses play at UNC😂

I see BC handling USC pretty easy, thinking 17-8. Can’t wait to watch SB vs. SU. Battle of zone defenses. I think a one or two goal game either way.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

SB looked very sharp. Score could have been much worse.

Did the superstar freshman do anything?

Yes 2 goals on 4 shots . Not bad , thanks for asking .

Would have expected more!

Different girl

Think BC USC will be a very good game BC by a couple

[quote=Anonymous]You mean ponies? The horses play at UNC😂

Absolutely horses number #1 recruit and former YJ commit leading the charge for UNC

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]SB looked very sharp. Score could have been much worse.

Did the superstar freshman do anything?

Yes 2 goals on 4 shots . Not bad , thanks for asking .

Would have expected more!

Different girl

What happened to all those highly touted YJ girls that went to SB?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Think BC USC will be a very good game BC by a couple

All depends on if BC shares the ball, can’t always depend on one player, even if it’s the best offensive player in women’s lacrosse.

Is there just not enough talent to go around? I know JMU shocked the lacrosse world by winning the National Championship in 2018 and Navy surprised everyone by advancing to the Final Four in 2017 but C'mon man... can we get some parity? Stony Brook has done a great job and is recognized by most as a Top 10 Program But they have not made it to Championship weekend. Virginia, Princeton, Penn, Florida, Notre Dame all Top 10 Programs but its been a while since they were in the Final Four or won a Championship. Not even sure if Notre Dame has ever gone to The Final Four. Duke has fallen off and has not been Top 20 the past few years. Penn State looks to be heading in the right direction after a couple of down years after back to back Final Four years.

You would think that with the growth of the sport it would be attracting more "Athletes" but it appears as though the same 10 - 15 teams are able to land just about all of the top players.

Michigan had a great year in 2019 but it looks like they might have taken a step back. Georgetown has fallen along with Hopkins.

I guess when you look at the Top 15 -20 Programs they cover all the bases for recruits. If you want to go out west USC and Stanford are excellent schools with competitive (although not yesterday for USC) programs. In The MidWest you obviously have Northwestern and Notre Dame. If you want warm weather and the south you have Florida, Duke and North Carolina. Big State School there is Maryland, Virginia, Penn State... Ivy you have Princeton and Penn (Dartmouth?). Northeast / New England / Boston area obviously Syracuse, Boston College (Dartmouth?) Want to stay on Long Island there is Stony Brook. Want to be in the Swamp AKA DC you have Georgetown. Hopkins is a great school with a good program if Baltimore is your thing, Loyola is right up the road and is a great fit for a lot of student athletes. Navy has become a strong program for the very special individual who wants to challenge themselves in that environment.

The top recruits can usually find their "Fit" at one of these schools... City, Country, Suburban, South, Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, New England, Med-West, West Coast, Big School, Small School etc... They all excellent schools.

Just my thoughts on why it is so difficult for other programs to attract top talent.

couple hundred you mean.....BC by at least 12

Can we just put the SBU freshman animonsity to bed . I get that the US team tryout selection was disgraceful and the hype machine is over the top but these are 18 year olds who honestly did not ask for all the hype. I am pretty sure the next AK is a little embarrassed with all that has gone on and how she has performed. Freshman year of college is hard enough , add in Covid and unrealistic expectations and do we really need to pile on .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we just put the SBU freshman animonsity to bed. I get that the US team tryout selection was disgraceful and the hype machine is over the top but these are 18-year-olds who honestly did not ask for all the hype. I am pretty sure the next AK is a little embarrassed with all that has gone on and how she has performed. Freshman year of college is hard enough, add in Covid and unrealistic expectations, and do we really need to pile on.

No, we do not. There are some fools who just can't help themselves. The bitterness and jealousy always come through.

Sue knock it off your embarrassing

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]You mean ponies? The horses play at UNC😂

Absolutely horses number #1 recruit and former YJ commit leading the charge for UNC

Wait. What. She committed to YJ. Didn’t know that you com-mitt to YJ. I guess that goes on YJ player bio’s also. Then a YJ player gets to commit to a college. Oh yea... so now YJ players are horses. Wow. Amazing

You trolls are amazing .Sorry but I would not want my kid playing with or against North. Her antics are embarrassing and its always all about her so I would not want my kid playing on the same team , that said she is very good but seems overly hyped up so I would not want my kid to play against her. There are a number of players I would take over her if you want to win big games which she has never done , players that make those around them better but can do it on their own when needed. The horses comments are ridiculous as it just a saying and the SBU ,UNC game was closer than the score but UNC clearly outplayed them .To the keyboard tough guy who thinks he knows who people are why be such a flaccid coward and speak to these people face to face as you seem to think you know who they are. I forgot you are too much of a flaccid coward to actually do that .

Can we finally stop all this Stony Brook nonsense if they played in the ACC they wouldn’t be even ranked in the top 15-20.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we finally stop all this Stony Brook nonsense if they played in the ACC they wouldn’t be even ranked in the top 15-20.

I was definitely expecting a much different game than that!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we finally stop all this Stony Brook nonsense if they played in the ACC they wouldn’t be even ranked in the top 15-20.

That's pure FACT!!!
I think this Cuse loss (cuse didn't have best player either) puts them back outside the top 10.
2 games vs ACC teams and 2 losses by a combined 17 goals

SBU will now go beat up on their in conference teams and run up their stays and Spallina will convince inside lax that their team is top five and he has a sure fire Tewaaraton player on his team when in reality if they played in the ACC it would be obvious that neither of those things are true .

No question SB didn’t have their best day and SU played flawless and inspired lax today. Surprising as both play a similar defense.

SU right now is the team to beat. UNC , ND and NW very strong but SU playing as a complete team right now is stronger. The EH loss as not apparent of a big issue today is a huge loss for them. I pray the injury is not bad and she can return. Lax needs players like her.

Another note SU backer zone is forcing many shooting space calls or players to pull up on shots, which are both good results for SU. The 8M is a tough shot. Also noticed SU using the old check to bottom of stick and pulling it. The refs see it, but used all over field.

Both backers were in 3 seconds all day but refs missing it. The backer zone is awesome when 3 seconds not called.

Onto next week we go.

Stony brook will be fine, they will end up in the 5-10 spot as they deserve. Until they lose to a team they should beat they won’t drop too far.
This year like last year is Cure’s year.. they are a senior/ Grad student heavy team who are battle tested and should be there at the end but They have ND and UNC still to come. a lot of lax left to play.
Hawryschuk was my tewaaraton favorite, sad to see her on crutches. It does not look promising.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

No question SB didn’t have their best day and SU played flawless and inspired lax today. Surprising as both play a similar defense.

SU right now is the team to beat. UNC , ND and NW very strong but SU playing as a complete team right now is stronger. The EH loss as not apparent of a big issue today is a huge loss for them. I pray the injury is not bad and she can return. Lax needs players like her.

Another note SU backer zone is forcing many shooting space calls or players to pull up on shots, which are both good results for SU. The 8M is a tough shot. Also noticed SU using the old check to bottom of stick and pulling it. The refs see it, but used all over field.

Both backers were in 3 seconds all day but refs missing it. The backer zone is awesome when 3 seconds not called.

Onto next week we go.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Is there just not enough talent to go around? I know JMU shocked the lacrosse world by winning the National Championship in 2018 and Navy surprised everyone by advancing to the Final Four in 2017 but C'mon man... can we get some parity? Stony Brook has done a great job and is recognized by most as a Top 10 Program But they have not made it to Championship weekend. Virginia, Princeton, Penn, Florida, Notre Dame all Top 10 Programs but its been a while since they were in the Final Four or won a Championship. Not even sure if Notre Dame has ever gone to The Final Four. Duke has fallen off and has not been Top 20 the past few years. Penn State looks to be heading in the right direction after a couple of down years after back to back Final Four years.

You would think that with the growth of the sport it would be attracting more "Athletes" but it appears as though the same 10 - 15 teams are able to land just about all of the top players.

Michigan had a great year in 2019 but it looks like they might have taken a step back. Georgetown has fallen along with Hopkins.

I guess when you look at the Top 15 -20 Programs they cover all the bases for recruits. If you want to go out west USC and Stanford are excellent schools with competitive (although not yesterday for USC) programs. In The MidWest you obviously have Northwestern and Notre Dame. If you want warm weather and the south you have Florida, Duke and North Carolina. Big State School there is Maryland, Virginia, Penn State... Ivy you have Princeton and Penn (Dartmouth?). Northeast / New England / Boston area obviously Syracuse, Boston College (Dartmouth?) Want to stay on Long Island there is Stony Brook. Want to be in the Swamp AKA DC you have Georgetown. Hopkins is a great school with a good program if Baltimore is your thing, Loyola is right up the road and is a great fit for a lot of student athletes. Navy has become a strong program for the very special individual who wants to challenge themselves in that environment.

The top recruits can usually find their "Fit" at one of these schools... City, Country, Suburban, South, Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, New England, Med-West, West Coast, Big School, Small School etc... They all excellent schools.

Just my thoughts on why it is so difficult for other programs to attract top talent.

Because regardless of how much money us parents throw at club lacrosse there just isnt that much talent out there. College lacrosse is by far the easiest route for any girl that wants to play varsity sport in college. The top 10, the next ten and then you fall off a cliff. Teams ranked around 100 could get beat by most club summer teams. Same goes for D2 and D3 a handful of really good teams and then not much. Enjoy the ride, Cheer for your kid and dont over think it

Originally Posted by Anonymous

No question SB didn’t have their best day and SU played flawless and inspired lax today. Surprising as both play a similar defense.

SU right now is the team to beat. UNC , ND and NW very strong but SU playing as a complete team right now is stronger. The EH loss as not apparent of a big issue today is a huge loss for them. I pray the injury is not bad and she can return. Lax needs players like her.

Another note SU backer zone is forcing many shooting space calls or players to pull up on shots, which are both good results for SU. The 8M is a tough shot. Also noticed SU using the old check to bottom of stick and pulling it. The refs see it, but used all over field.

Both backers were in 3 seconds all day but refs missing it. The backer zone is awesome when 3 seconds not called.

Onto next week we go.

Here is the difference between SB and the best teams, Spallina only pushes individuals in a team sport. Look at UNC, in my opinion the best team with the best offensive player, but no one is dodging, there are no ISO’s it’s all ball movement. That’s the way you play this game.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

No question SB didn’t have their best day and SU played flawless and inspired lax today. Surprising as both play a similar defense.

SU right now is the team to beat. UNC , ND and NW very strong but SU playing as a complete team right now is stronger. The EH loss as not apparent of a big issue today is a huge loss for them. I pray the injury is not bad and she can return. Lax needs players like her.

Another note SU backer zone is forcing many shooting space calls or players to pull up on shots, which are both good results for SU. The 8M is a tough shot. Also noticed SU using the old check to bottom of stick and pulling it. The refs see it, but used all over field.

Both backers were in 3 seconds all day but refs missing it. The backer zone is awesome when 3 seconds not called.

Onto next week we go.

Here is the difference between SB and the best teams, Spallina only pushes individuals in a team sport. Look at UNC, in my opinion the best team with the best offensive player, but no one is dodging, there are no ISO’s it’s all ball movement. That’s the way you play this game.

UNC will dodge hard when they play against teams that plays man to man D.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

No question SB didn’t have their best day and SU played flawless and inspired lax today. Surprising as both play a similar defense.

SU right now is the team to beat. UNC , ND and NW very strong but SU playing as a complete team right now is stronger. The EH loss as not apparent of a big issue today is a huge loss for them. I pray the injury is not bad and she can return. Lax needs players like her.

Another note SU backer zone is forcing many shooting space calls or players to pull up on shots, which are both good results for SU. The 8M is a tough shot. Also noticed SU using the old check to bottom of stick and pulling it. The refs see it, but used all over field.

Both backers were in 3 seconds all day but refs missing it. The backer zone is awesome when 3 seconds not called.

Onto next week we go.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Is there just not enough talent to go around? I know JMU shocked the lacrosse world by winning the National Championship in 2018 and Navy surprised everyone by advancing to the Final Four in 2017 but C'mon man... can we get some parity? Stony Brook has done a great job and is recognized by most as a Top 10 Program But they have not made it to Championship weekend. Virginia, Princeton, Penn, Florida, Notre Dame all Top 10 Programs but its been a while since they were in the Final Four or won a Championship. Not even sure if Notre Dame has ever gone to The Final Four. Duke has fallen off and has not been Top 20 the past few years. Penn State looks to be heading in the right direction after a couple of down years after back to back Final Four years.

You would think that with the growth of the sport it would be attracting more "Athletes" but it appears as though the same 10 - 15 teams are able to land just about all of the top players.

Michigan had a great year in 2019 but it looks like they might have taken a step back. Georgetown has fallen along with Hopkins.

I guess when you look at the Top 15 -20 Programs they cover all the bases for recruits. If you want to go out west USC and Stanford are excellent schools with competitive (although not yesterday for USC) programs. In The MidWest you obviously have Northwestern and Notre Dame. If you want warm weather and the south you have Florida, Duke and North Carolina. Big State School there is Maryland, Virginia, Penn State... Ivy you have Princeton and Penn (Dartmouth?). Northeast / New England / Boston area obviously Syracuse, Boston College (Dartmouth?) Want to stay on Long Island there is Stony Brook. Want to be in the Swamp AKA DC you have Georgetown. Hopkins is a great school with a good program if Baltimore is your thing, Loyola is right up the road and is a great fit for a lot of student athletes. Navy has become a strong program for the very special individual who wants to challenge themselves in that environment.

The top recruits can usually find their "Fit" at one of these schools... City, Country, Suburban, South, Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, New England, Med-West, West Coast, Big School, Small School etc... They all excellent schools.

Just my thoughts on why it is so difficult for other programs to attract top talent.

Because regardless of how much money us parents throw at club lacrosse there just isnt that much talent out there. College lacrosse is by far the easiest route for any girl that wants to play varsity sport in college. The top 10, the next ten and then you fall off a cliff. Teams ranked around 100 could get beat by most club summer teams. Same goes for D2 and D3 a handful of really good teams and then not much. Enjoy the ride, Cheer for your kid and dont over think it

Simple formula, the top programs recruit and bring in the best players and that’s how they remain the top programs. Most of the best HS players receive offers from several of the top 10 programs and most of the those players choose to play for one of the Top 10 programs. I’m willing to bet that if we look at where the Inside Lacrosse top 50 young gun seniors / Under Armour Senior All Americans choose to go to school there will be a direct correlation as to how those college programs perform. Pretty sure John Wooden once said “It’s about the Jimmy’s and the Joe’s more than the X’s and the 0’s”. Coaches need great players in order to win. More times than not the top recruits choose to go to one of the top programs. It’s not comply.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

No question SB didn’t have their best day and SU played flawless and inspired lax today. Surprising as both play a similar defense.

SU right now is the team to beat. UNC , ND and NW very strong but SU playing as a complete team right now is stronger. The EH loss as not apparent of a big issue today is a huge loss for them. I pray the injury is not bad and she can return. Lax needs players like her.

Another note SU backer zone is forcing many shooting space calls or players to pull up on shots, which are both good results for SU. The 8M is a tough shot. Also noticed SU using the old check to bottom of stick and pulling it. The refs see it, but used all over field.

Both backers were in 3 seconds all day but refs missing it. The backer zone is awesome when 3 seconds not called.

Onto next week we go.

Here is the difference between SB and the best teams, Spallina only pushes individuals in a team sport. Look at UNC, in my opinion the best team with the best offensive player, but no one is dodging, there are no ISO’s it’s all ball movement. That’s the way you play this game.

UNC will dodge hard when they play against teams that plays man to man D.

The historic coaches in all sports seem to
Be humble teachers of sport and life.

SU destroyed SB for few reasons. SB offense as pointed out above is built on a few players going to goal. That doesn’t work against a zone. What does work is dodge the first player and move the ball which is what SU did. SU also had six players above the goal and only one behind. The 6 were cutting off the 8M between goal circle and elbow. They had multiple goals on back cuts and look back to back side which was wide open. Many of the goals were clear 1M to 3M shots. I will say SB defense did do a much better job in second half as SU kept all the horses in the entire game. However the offense couldn’t score.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

No question SB didn’t have their best day and SU played flawless and inspired lax today. Surprising as both play a similar defense.

SU right now is the team to beat. UNC , ND and NW very strong but SU playing as a complete team right now is stronger. The EH loss as not apparent of a big issue today is a huge loss for them. I pray the injury is not bad and she can return. Lax needs players like her.

Another note SU backer zone is forcing many shooting space calls or players to pull up on shots, which are both good results for SU. The 8M is a tough shot. Also noticed SU using the old check to bottom of stick and pulling it. The refs see it, but used all over field.

Both backers were in 3 seconds all day but refs missing it. The backer zone is awesome when 3 seconds not called.

Onto next week we go.

Here is the difference between SB and the best teams, Spallina only pushes individuals in a team sport. Look at UNC, in my opinion the best team with the best offensive player, but no one is dodging, there are no ISO’s it’s all ball movement. That’s the way you play this game.

In women's lacrosse, the teams that win championships win because they have the best team defense and exceptional goaltending.

As for SBU, they are a very good program and have been for some time now. I do not like looking back more than 5 years or so when trying do determine which programs are at the top of the game although I'm sure if we look back 10 or 15 years we will find the list to be much the same. Each year there seem to be 4 or 5 teams that emerge out of the Top 10 as being a cut above, 2021 looks to be no different. Stony Brook has flirted with cracking that top 5 but has yet to get over the hump. Depth seams to be what separates those top teams down the stretch. Stony Brook has not had the depth.

Big 10 in full swing today with the exception of Penn State. Michigan seems to have fallen off from their 2019 season, Maryland is off as well, Northwestern is the clear favorite. We will find out if Penn State is back when they face Northwestern next week. I am guessing The Top two B1G Teams will make the tournament will there be a third team? I think at least 3 Big 10 Teams will make the NCAA Tournament especially with The Ivy's not playing. We all know The ACC is loaded can any Big 10 Teams compete this year? Northwestern is going to put up big numbers just not sure they can hold teams defensively.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Big 10 in full swing today with the exception of Penn State. Michigan seems to have fallen off from their 2019 season, Maryland is off as well, Northwestern is the clear favorite. We will find out if Penn State is back when they face Northwestern next week. I am guessing The Top two B1G Teams will make the tournament will there be a third team? I think at least 3 Big 10 Teams will make the NCAA Tournament especially with The Ivy's not playing. We all know The ACC is loaded can any Big 10 Teams compete this year? Northwestern is going to put up big numbers just not sure they can hold teams defensively.

Big 10 will have three, Northwestern, Penn State and Maryland and with no Ivy’s we could see a fourth... I’m going with Rutgers : )

Stony brook. Now that’s a good one. When they can beat an actual
Good team. Then we can talk

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stony brook. Now that’s a good one. When they can beat an actual
Good team. Then we can talk

Are you talking to yourself?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stony brook. Now that’s a good one. When they can beat an actual
Good team. Then we can talk

Like the gentleman mentioned earlier. Unless SB can consistently play BIG 10 or ACC opponents, they are irrelevant. There is no comparison. Keep dominating Wagner and Hofstra! Kudos!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stony brook. Now that’s a good one. When they can beat an actual
Good team. Then we can talk

Like the gentleman mentioned earlier. Unless SB can consistently play BIG 10 or ACC opponents, they are irrelevant. There is no comparison. Keep dominating Wagner and Hofstra! Kudos!

Exactly

That was creative you posted them answered your self

Management

BIG 10 be despicable this year.

After northwestern the Big 10 is down big time this year ACC top to bottom is on another level minus Louisville
With no ivys this year and limited out of conference games it will be a very interesting NCAA bracket Think we can all agree with that

Originally Posted by Anonymous

No question SB didn’t have their best day and SU played flawless and inspired lax today. Surprising as both play a similar defense.

SU right now is the team to beat. UNC , ND and NW very strong but SU playing as a complete team right now is stronger. The EH loss as not apparent of a big issue today is a huge loss for them. I pray the injury is not bad and she can return. Lax needs players like her.

Another note SU backer zone is forcing many shooting space calls or players to pull up on shots, which are both good results for SU. The 8M is a tough shot. Also noticed SU using the old check to bottom of stick and pulling it. The refs see it, but used all over field.

Both backers were in 3 seconds all day but refs missing it. The backer zone is awesome when 3 seconds not called.

Onto next week we go.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Is there just not enough talent to go around? I know JMU shocked the lacrosse world by winning the National Championship in 2018 and Navy surprised everyone by advancing to the Final Four in 2017 but C'mon man... can we get some parity? Stony Brook has done a great job and is recognized by most as a Top 10 Program But they have not made it to Championship weekend. Virginia, Princeton, Penn, Florida, Notre Dame all Top 10 Programs but its been a while since they were in the Final Four or won a Championship. Not even sure if Notre Dame has ever gone to The Final Four. Duke has fallen off and has not been Top 20 the past few years. Penn State looks to be heading in the right direction after a couple of down years after back to back Final Four years.

You would think that with the growth of the sport it would be attracting more "Athletes" but it appears as though the same 10 - 15 teams are able to land just about all of the top players.

Michigan had a great year in 2019 but it looks like they might have taken a step back. Georgetown has fallen along with Hopkins.

I guess when you look at the Top 15 -20 Programs they cover all the bases for recruits. If you want to go out west USC and Stanford are excellent schools with competitive (although not yesterday for USC) programs. In The MidWest you obviously have Northwestern and Notre Dame. If you want warm weather and the south you have Florida, Duke and North Carolina. Big State School there is Maryland, Virginia, Penn State... Ivy you have Princeton and Penn (Dartmouth?). Northeast / New England / Boston area obviously Syracuse, Boston College (Dartmouth?) Want to stay on Long Island there is Stony Brook. Want to be in the Swamp AKA DC you have Georgetown. Hopkins is a great school with a good program if Baltimore is your thing, Loyola is right up the road and is a great fit for a lot of student athletes. Navy has become a strong program for the very special individual who wants to challenge themselves in that environment.

The top recruits can usually find their "Fit" at one of these schools... City, Country, Suburban, South, Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, New England, Med-West, West Coast, Big School, Small School etc... They all excellent schools.

Just my thoughts on why it is so difficult for other programs to attract top talent.

Because regardless of how much money us parents throw at club lacrosse there just isnt that much talent out there. College lacrosse is by far the easiest route for any girl that wants to play varsity sport in college. The top 10, the next ten and then you fall off a cliff. Teams ranked around 100 could get beat by most club summer teams. Same goes for D2 and D3 a handful of really good teams and then not much. Enjoy the ride, Cheer for your kid and dont over think it

Agreed

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stony brook. Now that’s a good one. When they can beat an actual
Good team. Then we can talk

Like the gentleman mentioned earlier. Unless SB can consistently play BIG 10 or ACC opponents, they are irrelevant. There is no comparison. Keep dominating Wagner and Hofstra! Kudos!

Exactly

Stony Brook gets a lot of attention on here so I thought I would point out some facts so that people can see actual results as opposed to hype or detest.

Since 2015 here is how Stony Brook has actually done. (Thats 5 full seasons, 1 abbreviated season, and the current season).

Overal Record............... 97 - 17

Record Vs Top 20......... 22 - 16 (Teams that finished season in Top 20)

Record Vs Top 10........ 7 - 14 (Teams that finished season in Top 10)

Vs Perennial Top 20.... 12 - 13

Perennial Top 20 (Teams that ended the season ranked in the Top 20 in each of the 5 years from 2015 thru 2019. Stony Brook is one of those 10 Teams). (ND, PSU, JMU were the only teams to finish Top 20 four times in the five years 2015 -2019).

Maryland................. 0 - 2
North Carolina......... 0 - 1
Syracuse................. 1 - 2
Princeton................. 1 - 2
Florida...................... 1 - 4
Boston College........ 1 - 1
Northwestern........... 4 -1
Penn........................ 1 - 0
Virginia..................... 0 - 0

Notre Dame............. 1 - 0
James Madison....... 1 - 0
Penn State............... 1 - 0

Love them or detest them, they are what they are. Stony Brook has been one of the 10 best programs for several years now but their Team Records and Individual Player Statistics have been skewed due to their conference competition or lack there of. Stony Brook has done a good job with their out of conference schedule but their overall schedule is still less challenging than the other Top Programs.

NCAA Tournament Results are what they are...

2013: # 10 at end of regular season. # 11 in the final Poll.. : They were 16 - 2 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

2014: # 20 at end of regular season. # 20 in the final Poll.. : They were 16 - 3 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2015: # 6 at end of regular season. # 11 in the final Poll.. : They were 18 - 1 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Princeton in round of 16.

2016: # 7 at end of regular season. # 8 in the final Poll.. : They were 15 - 3 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2017: # 4 at end of regular season. # 4 in the final Poll.. : They were 18 - 1 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in round of 8.

2018: # 1 at end of regular season. # 5 in the final Poll.. : They were 19 - 0 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Boston College in round of 8.

2019: # 15 at end of regular season. # 12 in the final Poll.. : They were 15 - 4 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

Stony Brook is a Top 10 Program, that puts SBU in some pretty good company.

^^ Well crafted and researched post..thank you. I dont think anyone though SB was beating Cuse Saturday. I didnt think it would be as skewed as it was but maybe Cuse is that good vs SB is that bad.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

No question SB didn’t have their best day and SU played flawless and inspired lax today. Surprising as both play a similar defense.

SU right now is the team to beat. UNC , ND and NW very strong but SU playing as a complete team right now is stronger. The EH loss as not apparent of a big issue today is a huge loss for them. I pray the injury is not bad and she can return. Lax needs players like her.

Another note SU backer zone is forcing many shooting space calls or players to pull up on shots, which are both good results for SU. The 8M is a tough shot. Also noticed SU using the old check to bottom of stick and pulling it. The refs see it, but used all over field.

Both backers were in 3 seconds all day but refs missing it. The backer zone is awesome when 3 seconds not called.

Onto next week we go.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Is there just not enough talent to go around? I know JMU shocked the lacrosse world by winning the National Championship in 2018 and Navy surprised everyone by advancing to the Final Four in 2017 but C'mon man... can we get some parity? Stony Brook has done a great job and is recognized by most as a Top 10 Program But they have not made it to Championship weekend. Virginia, Princeton, Penn, Florida, Notre Dame all Top 10 Programs but its been a while since they were in the Final Four or won a Championship. Not even sure if Notre Dame has ever gone to The Final Four. Duke has fallen off and has not been Top 20 the past few years. Penn State looks to be heading in the right direction after a couple of down years after back to back Final Four years.

You would think that with the growth of the sport it would be attracting more "Athletes" but it appears as though the same 10 - 15 teams are able to land just about all of the top players.

Michigan had a great year in 2019 but it looks like they might have taken a step back. Georgetown has fallen along with Hopkins.

I guess when you look at the Top 15 -20 Programs they cover all the bases for recruits. If you want to go out west USC and Stanford are excellent schools with competitive (although not yesterday for USC) programs. In The MidWest you obviously have Northwestern and Notre Dame. If you want warm weather and the south you have Florida, Duke and North Carolina. Big State School there is Maryland, Virginia, Penn State... Ivy you have Princeton and Penn (Dartmouth?). Northeast / New England / Boston area obviously Syracuse, Boston College (Dartmouth?) Want to stay on Long Island there is Stony Brook. Want to be in the Swamp AKA DC you have Georgetown. Hopkins is a great school with a good program if Baltimore is your thing, Loyola is right up the road and is a great fit for a lot of student athletes. Navy has become a strong program for the very special individual who wants to challenge themselves in that environment.

The top recruits can usually find their "Fit" at one of these schools... City, Country, Suburban, South, Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, New England, Med-West, West Coast, Big School, Small School etc... They all excellent schools.

Just my thoughts on why it is so difficult for other programs to attract top talent.

Because regardless of how much money us parents throw at club lacrosse there just isnt that much talent out there. College lacrosse is by far the easiest route for any girl that wants to play varsity sport in college. The top 10, the next ten and then you fall off a cliff. Teams ranked around 100 could get beat by most club summer teams. Same goes for D2 and D3 a handful of really good teams and then not much. Enjoy the ride, Cheer for your kid and dont over think it

Agreed

Nike US Lacrosse Poll

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Notre Dame
4 Northwestern
5 Virginia
6 Florida
7 Stony Brook
8 Duke
9 Penn State
10 Maryland
11 Boston College
12 Richmond
13 James Madison
14 Towson
15 Loyola
16 UMass
17 Virginia Tech
18 Rutgers
19 USC
20 Louisville

Some things that jump out at me:

Stony Brook at # 7. SBU was Blown out by 1 & 2 ... we might want to drop them out of the Top 10 at least for now.

Loyola at # 15. They are 0 - 2 and were blown out in both games. How are they only 1 spot behind Towson? Towson Vs Loyola was not close.

USC at #19. I realize they might have been Jet Lagged but again they are 0 - 2 and neither game was close and both Stony Brook and Boston College are unproven this year.

ND has not played a game... Keep them out until the compete.

Is Duke really Top 10?

some early Tewaaraton thoughts predictions:

Top contenders : North,Ortega, Scane ,Kennedy

Kennedy : While elite on the draw circle she is not elite on either the offensive or defensive side and if she played in the ACC would be a good player but would not have the numbers she has.She will now tear thru her conference putting up big numbers and Spallina hype machine will be in full effect. 1 assist on season and shooting percent 38% not very impressive.

North : Very dynamic and flashy but does not make anyone around her any better and her game seems to be all about her. When her team mate passed up on the empty net goal against USC with the game all but over but North decided to put one more in to pad the stat line with 20 seconds or so left it showed exactly what she is all about.

Scane; Putting up big numbers but also taking an incredible amount of shots per game. Has not played any real top teams yet so will be interesting when she does. I would say she is probably the front runner at the moment but would prefer if she did more than just score, no draws, not great at riding, and play little competition so far.

Ortega: The most well rounded of the group as she can score and get team mates involved . That said against the better competition this season she averages 2.6 g and 1.6 A on 42 % shooting while in the blow outs she has an average of 4g 2.5 A on 88% shooting. I watched several of their games this weekend and her 12 shots against Duke was a bit much when you have that talent around you and against Vandy she seemed like the good high school layer whose dad told them they need to score more .Another player who is purely offensive , no draws etc.

I usually think the Tewaaraton should go to the best player not the best scorer but the all around goal scorer ,who gets team mates involved with assists ,helps on the draw and plays great defense don't seem to exist anymore. Given the above I think Trenchard the defender from UNC who is also on the draw circle at times and is fun to watch will eventually be the one to win the award.

Whoever keeps saying Notre Dame has not played is incorrect and, quite frankly, should learn to do a quick fact check. Only 1 game early but did handle Vandy 19-5.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

some early Tewaaraton thoughts predictions:

Top contenders : North,Ortega, Scane ,Kennedy

Kennedy : While elite on the draw circle she is not elite on either the offensive or defensive side and if she played in the ACC would be a good player but would not have the numbers she has.She will now tear thru her conference putting up big numbers and Spallina hype machine will be in full effect. 1 assist on season and shooting percent 38% not very impressive.

North : Very dynamic and flashy but does not make anyone around her any better and her game seems to be all about her. When her team mate passed up on the empty net goal against USC with the game all but over but North decided to put one more in to pad the stat line with 20 seconds or so left it showed exactly what she is all about.

Scane; Putting up big numbers but also taking an incredible amount of shots per game. Has not played any real top teams yet so will be interesting when she does. I would say she is probably the front runner at the moment but would prefer if she did more than just score, no draws, not great at riding, and play little competition so far.

Ortega: The most well rounded of the group as she can score and get team mates involved . That said against the better competition this season she averages 2.6 g and 1.6 A on 42 % shooting while in the blow outs she has an average of 4g 2.5 A on 88% shooting. I watched several of their games this weekend and her 12 shots against Duke was a bit much when you have that talent around you and against Vandy she seemed like the good high school layer whose dad told them they need to score more .Another player who is purely offensive , no draws etc.

I usually think the Tewaaraton should go to the best player not the best scorer but the all around goal scorer ,who gets team mates involved with assists ,helps on the draw and plays great defense don't seem to exist anymore. Given the above I think Trenchard the defender from UNC who is also on the draw circle at times and is fun to watch will eventually be the one to win the award.

Agree and would love to see a Defender win it but I don't think it is likely. If Carolina wins the National Championship they should give it to The Carolina Defense, Goalie and Midfielders.....

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Whoever keeps saying Notre Dame has not played is incorrect and, quite frankly, should learn to do a quick fact check. Only 1 game early but did handle Vandy 19-5.

Who "keeps" saying Notre Dame has not played? it was said in one post that I am aware of and it looks like it was a mistake.

Why so sensitive?

One game or no games, what have they done (ever) to be considered # 3?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

some early Tewaaraton thoughts predictions:

Top contenders : North,Ortega, Scane ,Kennedy

Kennedy : While elite on the draw circle she is not elite on either the offensive or defensive side and if she played in the ACC would be a good player but would not have the numbers she has.She will now tear thru her conference putting up big numbers and Spallina hype machine will be in full effect. 1 assist on season and shooting percent 38% not very impressive.

North : Very dynamic and flashy but does not make anyone around her any better and her game seems to be all about her. When her team mate passed up on the empty net goal against USC with the game all but over but North decided to put one more in to pad the stat line with 20 seconds or so left it showed exactly what she is all about.

Scane; Putting up big numbers but also taking an incredible amount of shots per game. Has not played any real top teams yet so will be interesting when she does. I would say she is probably the front runner at the moment but would prefer if she did more than just score, no draws, not great at riding, and play little competition so far.

Ortega: The most well rounded of the group as she can score and get team mates involved . That said against the better competition this season she averages 2.6 g and 1.6 A on 42 % shooting while in the blow outs she has an average of 4g 2.5 A on 88% shooting. I watched several of their games this weekend and her 12 shots against Duke was a bit much when you have that talent around you and against Vandy she seemed like the good high school layer whose dad told them they need to score more .Another player who is purely offensive , no draws etc.

I usually think the Tewaaraton should go to the best player not the best scorer but the all around goal scorer ,who gets team mates involved with assists ,helps on the draw and plays great defense don't seem to exist anymore. Given the above I think Trenchard the defender from UNC who is also on the draw circle at times and is fun to watch will eventually be the one to win the award.

Agree and would love to see a Defender win it but I don't think it is likely. If Carolina wins the National Championship they should give it to The Carolina Defense, Goalie and Midfielders.....

That said, I do think the Carolina Attack is spectacular!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

some early Tewaaraton thoughts predictions:

Top contenders : North,Ortega, Scane ,Kennedy

Kennedy : While elite on the draw circle she is not elite on either the offensive or defensive side and if she played in the ACC would be a good player but would not have the numbers she has.She will now tear thru her conference putting up big numbers and Spallina hype machine will be in full effect. 1 assist on season and shooting percent 38% not very impressive.

North : Very dynamic and flashy but does not make anyone around her any better and her game seems to be all about her. When her team mate passed up on the empty net goal against USC with the game all but over but North decided to put one more in to pad the stat line with 20 seconds or so left it showed exactly what she is all about.

Scane; Putting up big numbers but also taking an incredible amount of shots per game. Has not played any real top teams yet so will be interesting when she does. I would say she is probably the front runner at the moment but would prefer if she did more than just score, no draws, not great at riding, and play little competition so far.

Ortega: The most well rounded of the group as she can score and get team mates involved . That said against the better competition this season she averages 2.6 g and 1.6 A on 42 % shooting while in the blow outs she has an average of 4g 2.5 A on 88% shooting. I watched several of their games this weekend and her 12 shots against Duke was a bit much when you have that talent around you and against Vandy she seemed like the good high school layer whose dad told them they need to score more .Another player who is purely offensive , no draws etc.

I usually think the Tewaaraton should go to the best player not the best scorer but the all around goal scorer ,who gets team mates involved with assists ,helps on the draw and plays great defense don't seem to exist anymore. Given the above I think Trenchard the defender from UNC who is also on the draw circle at times and is fun to watch will eventually be the one to win the award.

Agree and would love to see a Defender win it but I don't think it is likely. If Carolina wins the National Championship they should give it to The Carolina Defense, Goalie and Midfielders.....

That said, I do think the Carolina Attack is spectacular!

Agree and great to see BTB done well.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

some early Tewaaraton thoughts predictions:

Top contenders : North,Ortega, Scane ,Kennedy

Kennedy : While elite on the draw circle she is not elite on either the offensive or defensive side and if she played in the ACC would be a good player but would not have the numbers she has.She will now tear thru her conference putting up big numbers and Spallina hype machine will be in full effect. 1 assist on season and shooting percent 38% not very impressive.

North : Very dynamic and flashy but does not make anyone around her any better and her game seems to be all about her. When her team mate passed up on the empty net goal against USC with the game all but over but North decided to put one more in to pad the stat line with 20 seconds or so left it showed exactly what she is all about.

Scane; Putting up big numbers but also taking an incredible amount of shots per game. Has not played any real top teams yet so will be interesting when she does. I would say she is probably the front runner at the moment but would prefer if she did more than just score, no draws, not great at riding, and play little competition so far.

Ortega: The most well rounded of the group as she can score and get team mates involved . That said against the better competition this season she averages 2.6 g and 1.6 A on 42 % shooting while in the blow outs she has an average of 4g 2.5 A on 88% shooting. I watched several of their games this weekend and her 12 shots against Duke was a bit much when you have that talent around you and against Vandy she seemed like the good high school layer whose dad told them they need to score more .Another player who is purely offensive , no draws etc.

I usually think the Tewaaraton should go to the best player not the best scorer but the all around goal scorer ,who gets team mates involved with assists ,helps on the draw and plays great defense don't seem to exist anymore. Given the above I think Trenchard the defender from UNC who is also on the draw circle at times and is fun to watch will eventually be the one to win the award.

Agree and would love to see a Defender win it but I don't think it is likely. If Carolina wins the National Championship they should give it to The Carolina Defense, Goalie and Midfielders.....

That said, I do think the Carolina Attack is spectacular!

Some comments...
too early for this list a lot of lax to still play, but my thoughts
You might want to add Katie Hoeg
or Andie Aldave from ND to list or Trombetta from Florida
Agree with Kennedy and Scane comments
Ortega - Duke game weather prob played a part in shots

Also if players aren't on draw circle why are they penalised in your thinking?
Most attackers, unless they take draw cant really help on draw circle.
Kennedy is good on ride, ortega is pretty good on the ride
North...taking draw may hurt her as she plays every minute and in a tough game is gonna be gassed by end.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

some early Tewaaraton thoughts predictions:

Top contenders : North,Ortega, Scane ,Kennedy

Kennedy : While elite on the draw circle she is not elite on either the offensive or defensive side and if she played in the ACC would be a good player but would not have the numbers she has.She will now tear thru her conference putting up big numbers and Spallina hype machine will be in full effect. 1 assist on season and shooting percent 38% not very impressive.

North : Very dynamic and flashy but does not make anyone around her any better and her game seems to be all about her. When her team mate passed up on the empty net goal against USC with the game all but over but North decided to put one more in to pad the stat line with 20 seconds or so left it showed exactly what she is all about.

Scane; Putting up big numbers but also taking an incredible amount of shots per game. Has not played any real top teams yet so will be interesting when she does. I would say she is probably the front runner at the moment but would prefer if she did more than just score, no draws, not great at riding, and play little competition so far.

Ortega: The most well rounded of the group as she can score and get team mates involved . That said against the better competition this season she averages 2.6 g and 1.6 A on 42 % shooting while in the blow outs she has an average of 4g 2.5 A on 88% shooting. I watched several of their games this weekend and her 12 shots against Duke was a bit much when you have that talent around you and against Vandy she seemed like the good high school layer whose dad told them they need to score more .Another player who is purely offensive , no draws etc.

I usually think the Tewaaraton should go to the best player not the best scorer but the all around goal scorer ,who gets team mates involved with assists ,helps on the draw and plays great defense don't seem to exist anymore. Given the above I think Trenchard the defender from UNC who is also on the draw circle at times and is fun to watch will eventually be the one to win the award.

Agree and would love to see a Defender win it but I don't think it is likely. If Carolina wins the National Championship they should give it to The Carolina Defense, Goalie and Midfielders.....

That said, I do think the Carolina Attack is spectacular!

Some comments...
too early for this list a lot of lax to still play, but my thoughts
You might want to add Katie Hoeg
or Andie Aldave from ND to list or Trombetta from Florida
Agree with Kennedy and Scane comments
Ortega - Duke game weather prob played a part in shots

Also if players aren't on draw circle why are they penalised in your thinking?
Most attackers, unless they take draw cant really help on draw circle.
Kennedy is good on ride, ortega is pretty good on the ride
North...taking draw may hurt her as she plays every minute and in a tough game is gonna be gassed by end.

I guess I could have said way too early lol.
I would add Katie Hoeg if I thought they took leadership into account , you can see she is clearly a player that directs their offense and really like the way she spreads the ball around but in the end its a numbers game and they want pure goal scorers and honestly ball hogs. Will keep her in the honorable mention at this time.

Trombetta is definitely close to Trenchard its just she plays on a team that is not elite so I think it makes it real difficult.
Aldave has only played 1 game and got hurt so maybe down the road.

I get your point about not being on the draw circle or taking the draw but all else being equal it may be the added dimension that makes 1 player stand out more than another

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stony brook. Now that’s a good one. When they can beat an actual
Good team. Then we can talk

Like the gentleman mentioned earlier. Unless SB can consistently play BIG 10 or ACC opponents, they are irrelevant. There is no comparison. Keep dominating Wagner and Hofstra! Kudos!

Exactly

Stony Brook gets a lot of attention on here so I thought I would point out some facts so that people can see actual results as opposed to hype or detest.

Since 2015 here is how Stony Brook has actually done. (Thats 5 full seasons, 1 abbreviated season, and the current season).

Overal Record............... 97 - 17

Record Vs Top 20......... 22 - 16 (Teams that finished season in Top 20)

Record Vs Top 10........ 7 - 14 (Teams that finished season in Top 10)

Vs Perennial Top 20.... 12 - 13

Perennial Top 20 (Teams that ended the season ranked in the Top 20 in each of the 5 years from 2015 thru 2019. Stony Brook is one of those 10 Teams). (ND, PSU, JMU were the only teams to finish Top 20 four times in the five years 2015 -2019).

Maryland................. 0 - 2
North Carolina......... 0 - 1
Syracuse................. 1 - 2
Princeton................. 1 - 2
Florida...................... 1 - 4
Boston College........ 1 - 1
Northwestern........... 4 -1
Penn........................ 1 - 0
Virginia..................... 0 - 0

Notre Dame............. 1 - 0
James Madison....... 1 - 0
Penn State............... 1 - 0

Love them or detest them, they are what they are. Stony Brook has been one of the 10 best programs for several years now but their Team Records and Individual Player Statistics have been skewed due to their conference competition or lack there of. Stony Brook has done a good job with their out of conference schedule but their overall schedule is still less challenging than the other Top Programs.

NCAA Tournament Results are what they are...

2013: # 10 at end of regular season. # 11 in the final Poll.. : They were 16 - 2 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

2014: # 20 at end of regular season. # 20 in the final Poll.. : They were 16 - 3 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2015: # 6 at end of regular season. # 11 in the final Poll.. : They were 18 - 1 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Princeton in round of 16.

2016: # 7 at end of regular season. # 8 in the final Poll.. : They were 15 - 3 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2017: # 4 at end of regular season. # 4 in the final Poll.. : They were 18 - 1 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in round of 8.

2018: # 1 at end of regular season. # 5 in the final Poll.. : They were 19 - 0 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Boston College in round of 8.

2019: # 15 at end of regular season. # 12 in the final Poll.. : They were 15 - 4 going into the tournament. - They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

Stony Brook is a Top 10 Program, that puts SBU in some pretty good company.

Stony Brooks Schedule is a double edge sward, it helps with hype because there record is usually very good, it helps with player stats, recognition and accolades. On the other hand it does not prepare them for The NCAA Tournament.

Below is where each team finished the year in the poll / rankings for 2019 and how many games vs Top 20 Teams they played.

1 - Maryland - 15 Top 20 games.

2 - Boston College - 11 Top 20 games.

3 - North Carolina - 12 Top 20 games.

4 - Northwestern - 13 Top 20 games.

5 - Syracuse - 12 Top 20 games.

6 - Princeton - 10 Top 20 games.

7 - Virginia - 12 Top 20 games.

12 - Stony Brook - 7 Top 20 games.

13 - Florida - 9 Top 20 games.

14 - Penn 8 Top 20 games.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

After northwestern the Big 10 is down big time this year ACC top to bottom is on another level minus Louisville
With no ivys this year and limited out of conference games it will be a very interesting NCAA bracket Think we can all agree with that

Louisville, Duke and Virginia Tech are competitive teams but “another level”? They have not done anything to confirm that. Time will tell where BC and ND stack up to the top teams but as of now they have not established themselves for this season. Virginia is also unproven so far. They are all competitive but at this point only UNC and Syracuse look to be on another level.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

After northwestern the Big 10 is down big time this year ACC top to bottom is on another level minus Louisville
With no ivys this year and limited out of conference games it will be a very interesting NCAA bracket Think we can all agree with that

Louisville, Duke and Virginia Tech are competitive teams but “another level”? They have not done anything to confirm that. Time will tell where BC and ND stack up to the top teams but as of now they have not established themselves for this season. Virginia is also unproven so far. They are all competitive but at this point only UNC and Syracuse look to be on another level.

Louisville will need to win at least 3 of its next 5 games to be considered legit.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

After northwestern the Big 10 is down big time this year ACC top to bottom is on another level minus Louisville
With no ivys this year and limited out of conference games it will be a very interesting NCAA bracket Think we can all agree with that

Louisville, Duke and Virginia Tech are competitive teams but “another level”? They have not done anything to confirm that. Time will tell where BC and ND stack up to the top teams but as of now they have not established themselves for this season. Virginia is also unproven so far. They are all competitive but at this point only UNC and Syracuse look to be on another level.

Louisville will need to win at least 3 of its next 5 games to be considered legit.

Define "legit"... Their next three games are Virginia, Central Michigan and Marquette. Their next two are North Carolina and Notre Dame. Are you saying that if they beat Central Michigan, Marquette and either Virginia or ND that makes them Legit?

Boston College Vs UMass today @ 3:00 pm should be interesting. Umass won the match-up last year so I'm sure BC will be ready to go. This game could have Top 10 implications considering that with the exception of UNC, Syracuse, and Northwestern nobody has made a statement.

I'm going with UMass 14 - Boston College 13.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Boston College Vs UMass today @ 3:00 pm should be interesting. Umass won the match-up last year so I'm sure BC will be ready to go. This game could have Top 10 implications considering that with the exception of UNC, Syracuse, and Northwestern nobody has made a statement.

I'm going with UMass 14 - Boston College 13.

BC wins this 5

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Boston College Vs UMass today @ 3:00 pm should be interesting. Umass won the match-up last year so I'm sure BC will be ready to go. This game could have Top 10 implications considering that with the exception of UNC, Syracuse, and Northwestern nobody has made a statement.

I'm going with UMass 14 - Boston College 13.

BC wins this 5

Looks like BC could be for real. I guess we will find out this weekend.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Boston College Vs UMass today @ 3:00 pm should be interesting. Umass won the match-up last year so I'm sure BC will be ready to go. This game could have Top 10 implications considering that with the exception of UNC, Syracuse, and Northwestern nobody has made a statement.

I'm going with UMass 14 - Boston College 13.

BC wins this 5

Looks like BC could be for real. I guess we will find out this weekend.

Big difference between UNC and UMASS, actually big difference between UNC and everyone!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Boston College Vs UMass today @ 3:00 pm should be interesting. Umass won the match-up last year so I'm sure BC will be ready to go. This game could have Top 10 implications considering that with the exception of UNC, Syracuse, and Northwestern nobody has made a statement.

I'm going with UMass 14 - Boston College 13.

BC wins this 5

Looks like BC could be for real. I guess we will find out this weekend.

Big difference between UNC and UMASS, actually big difference between UNC and everyone!!

UNC wins this by 8 . I would say UNC Cuse then ND NW just slightly behind . I think the PSU NW games this weekend will tell us a lot about both teams .

"UNC wins this by 8 . I would say UNC Cuse then ND NW just slightly behind . I think the PSU NW games this weekend will tell us a lot about both teams ."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why all the hype about Notre Dame? Maybe I missed it but have they actually done? Certainly a Top 15 Program but not sure they have ever done anything that would cause people to put them up there in the Top 4.

BC very young team (mostly fresh and soph from eligibility standpoint) that is well coached. Should soon be relevant again. Only 1 key player graduating after this year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

"UNC wins this by 8 . I would say UNC Cuse then ND NW just slightly behind . I think the PSU NW games this weekend will tell us a lot about both teams ."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why all the hype about Notre Dame? Maybe I missed it but have they actually done? Certainly a Top 15 Program but not sure they have ever done anything that would cause people to put them up there in the Top 4.

I am just looking at their players , they have a lot of high end senior, 5th year , 6th year players with some very good younger players. They beat NW ,Duke,BC last year and UNC the year before and bring back essentially every player who saw the field in big games including an excellent goalie.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

"UNC wins this by 8 . I would say UNC Cuse then ND NW just slightly behind . I think the PSU NW games this weekend will tell us a lot about both teams ."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why all the hype about Notre Dame? Maybe I missed it but have they actually done? Certainly a Top 15 Program but not sure they have ever done anything that would cause people to put them up there in the Top 4.

I am just looking at their players , they have a lot of high end senior, 5th year , 6th year players with some very good younger players. They beat NW ,Duke,BC last year and UNC the year before and bring back essentially every player who saw the field in big games including an excellent goalie.

Fair enough but it seems as though the knock on Notre Dame has been that they have had "players" for many many years but they have underperformed for a very long time. I think most people acknowledge that ND is a top program but they really have not been able to get over the hump. Have they ever made it to The Final Four? I honestly do not know if they have but i do not recall ND being there. I do not know the answer but when how many times in the past 10 years have they had a Top 10 recruiting class?

Northwestern Vs Penn State postponed... was really looking forward to this one, wanted to see if PSU was a possible Final Four contender... Still trying to figure out which teams can compete. Most on here would agree that North Carolina, Syracuse and Northwestern appear to be a cut above... Who will emerge out of the next tier? Notre Dame? PSU? Maryland? Virginia? Boston College? JMU? Strange year.... Covid, No Ivy's, Limited / non-traditional schedules, injuries, postponements, cancelations, limited / no fans etc...
Good luck to all, make the most of it.

UNC and Cuse on a collision course . UNC showed they can beat you in mai many different ways . I think Cuse will struggle to score when they meet up .?

Second time I watched UNC on TV with early start. They are very strong. JO very tough to stop. Middies very good on draw and KM showed some great offensive of takes(go YJs).

UNC defense looks very good but saw some one on one breakdowns. Overall solid as can be.

I also saw Cuse as well against Duke and SB. They also look very good and I feel the Cuse middies are more complete and run very well. The draw will be huge in this game.

What tempo game is played will be important. Cuse wants to run and UNC wants to settle offense with KH and JO show. SU defense is very fast and athletic with the backer zone. This will make UNC for sure move the ball, not the one v one game.

Goalies both strong.

If I was playing UNC I would see watch UF game. You will need a strong goalie performance but they had a good defense game plan on defense. 4 to 3 at half(again need to have good effort in goal)

But don’t sleep on ND.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

UNC and Cuse on a collision course . UNC showed they can beat you in mai many different ways . I think Cuse will struggle to score when they meet up .?

Cuse in no way will “struggle to score”...it’ll be a great game to watch.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

UNC and Cuse on a collision course . UNC showed they can beat you in mai many different ways . I think Cuse will struggle to score when they meet up .?

I think Cuse will be fires up for this game. They never got to play last year. Team seems solid without 51 but keeper needs to be on fire

Cuse has a very dynamic attack. Ward will be a big match up problem for UNC. The other three very strong as well.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Cuse has a very dynamic attack. Ward will be a big match up problem for UNC. The other three very strong as well.

I assume this is you being sarcastic .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Cuse has a very dynamic attack. Ward will be a big match up problem for UNC. The other three very strong as well.

There will be no big match up problems for UNC and Syracuse will be held below their season scoring average. UNC wins it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Cuse has a very dynamic attack. Ward will be a big match up problem for UNC. The other three very strong as well.

There will be no big match up problems for UNC and Syracuse will be held below their season scoring average. UNC wins it.

Syracuse 2nd best in acc this year, game won’t be that close.

UNC v SU will be all about defense and who’s can play there game for success. If SU can’t beat the one v one match up they will struggle. This is where SU excel moving ball after first
Slide. BC initially had some success, and won some of those match ups. SU also has a very good cutting game making you switch and communicate. This could also be a key component. On the other side, if SU can get pressure on ball and have the backer this will not be an easy day for UNC. SU really shifts hard to ball side so not easy to find open player. The key will be the pressure on the ball and on passers hands. If UNC can get ball to back side quickly it will be a long day for SU. However SU is as fast as UNC and can bring multiple draw takers and circle players. As we all know this game is won at the draw many times and between the pipes.

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Penn State
6 Florida
7 Stony Brook
8 Maryland
9 Virginia
10 Boston College
11 Towson
12 Duke
13 Navy
14 Virginia Tech
15 Richmond
16 Drexel
17 Louisville
18 Loyola
19 Stanford
20 Hofstra

Hopefully some teams will continue to improve so the NCAA tournament can be competitive and entertaining. Not sure which teams can do it, Penn State, Florida, Boston College, Maryland, Virginia? Obviously North Carolina and Syracuse are at the Top right now, If Northwesters defense has improved since last year they will be in the mix. Notre Dame is getting their usual hype but they are unproven so far. Stony Brook has not looked good, Loyola has fallen, Duke is still in a tail spin (what has happened to Duke). The rest of the Top 20 does not look competitive when compared to the Top 3 or 4 teams.

This 5th year nonsense is not good for the sport. In normal years the Top Programs stockpile the best players but now a few of those top teams are simply too deep. There is not enough talent to go around to begin with and now the Top Programs can keep their best players around for an extra year and also bring in seasoned high quality 5th year transfers.

IMHO, Stony Brook does not look like a Top 10 team, Duke and Towson are questionable inn the Top 15, Loyola has done nothing to prove that they belong in the Top 20. I guess the pollsters just go with the usual suspects.

On a positive note, after the Top 4 I think we will see some very competitive games. Towson vs Stony Brook was competitive, Ohio State, Hopkins, Rutgers and Michigan will compete with each other as will PSU and Maryland (I don't think anyone in the Big 10 beats Northwestern). Louisville, Virginia, Duke, Virginia Tech should all compete with each other just don't think they are as strong as BC or ND and UNC and Syracuse are in their own league.

Notre Dame, Penn State, Florida and BC will fight it out for the 4th spot in the Final Four.... Maybe Maryland as well.

With teams having to go back to normal scholarship numbers next year maybe we will see less of the 5th players.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Penn State
6 Florida
7 Stony Brook
8 Maryland
9 Virginia
10 Boston College
11 Towson
12 Duke
13 Navy
14 Virginia Tech
15 Richmond
16 Drexel
17 Louisville
18 Loyola
19 Stanford
20 Hofstra

Hopefully some teams will continue to improve so the NCAA tournament can be competitive and entertaining. Not sure which teams can do it, Penn State, Florida, Boston College, Maryland, Virginia? Obviously North Carolina and Syracuse are at the Top right now, If Northwesters defense has improved since last year they will be in the mix. Notre Dame is getting their usual hype but they are unproven so far. Stony Brook has not looked good, Loyola has fallen, Duke is still in a tail spin (what has happened to Duke). The rest of the Top 20 does not look competitive when compared to the Top 3 or 4 teams.

This 5th year nonsense is not good for the sport. In normal years the Top Programs stockpile the best players but now a few of those top teams are simply too deep. There is not enough talent to go around to begin with and now the Top Programs can keep their best players around for an extra year and also bring in seasoned high quality 5th year transfers.

IMHO, Stony Brook does not look like a Top 10 team, Duke and Towson are questionable inn the Top 15, Loyola has done nothing to prove that they belong in the Top 20. I guess the pollsters just go with the usual suspects.

On a positive note, after the Top 4 I think we will see some very competitive games. Towson vs Stony Brook was competitive, Ohio State, Hopkins, Rutgers and Michigan will compete with each other as will PSU and Maryland (I don't think anyone in the Big 10 beats Northwestern). Louisville, Virginia, Duke, Virginia Tech should all compete with each other just don't think they are as strong as BC or ND and UNC and Syracuse are in their own league.

Notre Dame, Penn State, Florida and BC will fight it out for the 4th spot in the Final Four.... Maybe Maryland as well.

With teams having to go back to normal scholarship numbers next year maybe we will see less of the 5th players.

I don't mind the 5th year players ,most other sports have even more and essentially you are adding in more skilled players to a sport that needs them. Most schools still stayed at their 12 scholly limit so next year will be the same.

I think you are giving BC too much credit at this point and would say SBU has been better against their common opponents and would put ND PSU easily ahead of them with Fl MD slightly ahead.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Penn State
6 Florida
7 Stony Brook
8 Maryland
9 Virginia
10 Boston College
11 Towson
12 Duke
13 Navy
14 Virginia Tech
15 Richmond
16 Drexel
17 Louisville
18 Loyola
19 Stanford
20 Hofstra

Hopefully some teams will continue to improve so the NCAA tournament can be competitive and entertaining. Not sure which teams can do it, Penn State, Florida, Boston College, Maryland, Virginia? Obviously North Carolina and Syracuse are at the Top right now, If Northwesters defense has improved since last year they will be in the mix. Notre Dame is getting their usual hype but they are unproven so far. Stony Brook has not looked good, Loyola has fallen, Duke is still in a tail spin (what has happened to Duke). The rest of the Top 20 does not look competitive when compared to the Top 3 or 4 teams.

This 5th year nonsense is not good for the sport. In normal years the Top Programs stockpile the best players but now a few of those top teams are simply too deep. There is not enough talent to go around to begin with and now the Top Programs can keep their best players around for an extra year and also bring in seasoned high quality 5th year transfers.

IMHO, Stony Brook does not look like a Top 10 team, Duke and Towson are questionable inn the Top 15, Loyola has done nothing to prove that they belong in the Top 20. I guess the pollsters just go with the usual suspects.

On a positive note, after the Top 4 I think we will see some very competitive games. Towson vs Stony Brook was competitive, Ohio State, Hopkins, Rutgers and Michigan will compete with each other as will PSU and Maryland (I don't think anyone in the Big 10 beats Northwestern). Louisville, Virginia, Duke, Virginia Tech should all compete with each other just don't think they are as strong as BC or ND and UNC and Syracuse are in their own league.

Notre Dame, Penn State, Florida and BC will fight it out for the 4th spot in the Final Four.... Maybe Maryland as well.

With teams having to go back to normal scholarship numbers next year maybe we will see less of the 5th players.

I don't mind the 5th year players ,most other sports have even more and essentially you are adding in more skilled players to a sport that needs them. Most schools still stayed at their 12 scholly limit so next year will be the same.

I think you are giving BC too much credit at this point and would say SBU has been better against their common opponents and would put ND PSU easily ahead of them with Fl MD slightly ahead.

The NCAA allowed teams to go above the 12 scholarship limit for this year. Any scholarship that a returning 5th year player had did not count against the "12 scholarship cap". I believe it was up to each school to decide if they would go above the 12 cap, I do not know the percentage of schools that chose to fund the additional scholarships (my kids school chose to do it). I would guess the top programs all did it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Penn State
6 Florida
7 Stony Brook
8 Maryland
9 Virginia
10 Boston College
11 Towson
12 Duke
13 Navy
14 Virginia Tech
15 Richmond
16 Drexel
17 Louisville
18 Loyola
19 Stanford
20 Hofstra

Hopefully some teams will continue to improve so the NCAA tournament can be competitive and entertaining. Not sure which teams can do it, Penn State, Florida, Boston College, Maryland, Virginia? Obviously North Carolina and Syracuse are at the Top right now, If Northwesters defense has improved since last year they will be in the mix. Notre Dame is getting their usual hype but they are unproven so far. Stony Brook has not looked good, Loyola has fallen, Duke is still in a tail spin (what has happened to Duke). The rest of the Top 20 does not look competitive when compared to the Top 3 or 4 teams.

This 5th year nonsense is not good for the sport. In normal years the Top Programs stockpile the best players but now a few of those top teams are simply too deep. There is not enough talent to go around to begin with and now the Top Programs can keep their best players around for an extra year and also bring in seasoned high quality 5th year transfers.

IMHO, Stony Brook does not look like a Top 10 team, Duke and Towson are questionable inn the Top 15, Loyola has done nothing to prove that they belong in the Top 20. I guess the pollsters just go with the usual suspects.

On a positive note, after the Top 4 I think we will see some very competitive games. Towson vs Stony Brook was competitive, Ohio State, Hopkins, Rutgers and Michigan will compete with each other as will PSU and Maryland (I don't think anyone in the Big 10 beats Northwestern). Louisville, Virginia, Duke, Virginia Tech should all compete with each other just don't think they are as strong as BC or ND and UNC and Syracuse are in their own league.

Notre Dame, Penn State, Florida and BC will fight it out for the 4th spot in the Final Four.... Maybe Maryland as well.

With teams having to go back to normal scholarship numbers next year maybe we will see less of the 5th players.

I don't mind the 5th year players ,most other sports have even more and essentially you are adding in more skilled players to a sport that needs them. Most schools still stayed at their 12 scholly limit so next year will be the same.

I think you are giving BC too much credit at this point and would say SBU has been better against their common opponents and would put ND PSU easily ahead of them with Fl MD slightly ahead.

Unfortunately Stony Brook does not have a very difficult schedule the rest of the way. I realize that it's not their fault but it is what it is. Hofstra might surprise this year, we will see. Not being in competitive game will hurt Stony Brook come Tournament time. My guess is an early exit from the tournament for SBU.

"Unfortunately Stony Brook does not have a very difficult schedule the rest of the way. I realize that it's not their fault but it is what it is. Hofstra might surprise this year, we will see. Not being in competitive game will hurt Stony Brook come Tournament time. My guess is an early exit from the tournament for SBU."

I could see a first round match up against BC as they are fairly regional with BC hitting the exits early. Hofstra will never be successful , they essentially only allow 1 player to shoot the ball ,fairly easy for any team to game plan against.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

UNC and Cuse on a collision course . UNC showed they can beat you in mai many different ways . I think Cuse will struggle to score when they meet up .?

I think Cuse will be fires up for this game. They never got to play last year. Team seems solid without 51 but keeper needs to be on fire

Should be great game. Both teams are loaded.... Just looking at the 12 Starters for each squad and they are very talented. UNC 10 of the 12 Starters were Under Armour All-Americans, It looks like 5 or 6 have earned All-American honors in college, they are loaded with upper classmen including 5th year players (1 grad student transfer who starts). Syracuse is loaded as well... It looks like 7 of the 12 starters were Under Armour All-Americans, and 4 or 5 have earned All-American as a college player. Syracuse is also a veteran team I do not believe any freshmen start for either team. (1 grad student transfer who starts). Both teams are deep and the other players who may not "start" but who play every game are all excellent. I think the edge goes to UNC in this one but there is a good chance they could play 3 games vs each other this year.

Does anyone have any insight as to why Duke has fallen off? Honest question, the program began in 1996, they made their first NCAA Tournament in 1998, They made it to the Final Four in 1999, they won their first ACC regular season championship in 2004, their first ACC Tournament in 2005, they went to the Final Four again in 2006, 2007 and 2008, from 2006 - 2015 they finished the season ranked in the Top 10 every year and made a couple more Final Fours, they ended the season Ranked 11th in 2016. Duke was not Top 20 in 2017, 2018 or 2019 (2020 doesn't count) and they do not look to be very good this year. I do not think there is another program that has fallen off like Duke. Just curious as to why they have dropped off.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

"Unfortunately Stony Brook does not have a very difficult schedule the rest of the way. I realize that it's not their fault but it is what it is. Hofstra might surprise this year, we will see. Not being in competitive game will hurt Stony Brook come Tournament time. My guess is an early exit from the tournament for SBU."

I could see a first round match up against BC as they are fairly regional with BC hitting the exits early. Hofstra will never be successful , they essentially only allow 1 player to shoot the ball ,fairly easy for any team to game plan against.

Very unlikely BC and SBU would meet in the first round, Hofstra is a solid second tier team as is Stony Brook (this year). Hofstra vs Stony Brook should be a competitive game this year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

"Unfortunately Stony Brook does not have a very difficult schedule the rest of the way. I realize that it's not their fault but it is what it is. Hofstra might surprise this year, we will see. Not being in competitive game will hurt Stony Brook come Tournament time. My guess is an early exit from the tournament for SBU."

I could see a first round match up against BC as they are fairly regional with BC hitting the exits early. Hofstra will never be successful , they essentially only allow 1 player to shoot the ball ,fairly easy for any team to game plan against.

Very unlikely BC and SBU would meet in the first round, Hofstra is a solid second tier team as is Stony Brook (this year). Hofstra vs Stony Brook should be a competitive game this year.

Hofstra needed a lot of luck to beat St Joseph’s by 1. As much as I’m not a SB fan they are in the second tier after unc cuse NW Hofstra is a team on the outskirts of the top 20 definitely improving tho
Previous post is spot on could see Sb with BC and possibly the NEC winner that the winner of that pool would play cuse in quarter final

Let’s say it the way it actually is After top 2 it’s a garbage shoot. NW is great but play absolutely no Defense. Norte Dame is also talented but are too busy playing weak teams and over this season and last short season play cupcake schedule but it’s never discussed on here Minus the top two anything is possible. Teams will improve as year goes on with no fall ball more than they ever have Maryland SB BC would not be shocking if these teams made a run. Penn state nah and Florida will have zero top 20 wins on their resume.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Does anyone have any insight as to why Duke has fallen off? Honest question, the program began in 1996, they made their first NCAA Tournament in 1998, They made it to the Final Four in 1999, they won their first ACC regular season championship in 2004, their first ACC Tournament in 2005, they went to the Final Four again in 2006, 2007 and 2008, from 2006 - 2015 they finished the season ranked in the Top 10 every year and made a couple more Final Fours, they ended the season Ranked 11th in 2016. Duke was not Top 20 in 2017, 2018 or 2019 (2020 doesn't count) and they do not look to be very good this year. I do not think there is another program that has fallen off like Duke. Just curious as to why they have dropped off.

One thought would be “did another team steal their thunder/ take their place” but I don’t see it. If Stanford, Vanderbilt, Hopkins or an Ivy other than (Princeton or Penn) was consistently Top 10 or even top 20 I would say maybe they were winning the recruiting battle against Duke. That doesn’t appear to be the case and from what I can tell they still get their fair share of high end recruits. Strange that they have dropped down a notch.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Does anyone have any insight as to why Duke has fallen off? Honest question, the program began in 1996, they made their first NCAA Tournament in 1998, They made it to the Final Four in 1999, they won their first ACC regular season championship in 2004, their first ACC Tournament in 2005, they went to the Final Four again in 2006, 2007 and 2008, from 2006 - 2015 they finished the season ranked in the Top 10 every year and made a couple more Final Fours, they ended the season Ranked 11th in 2016. Duke was not Top 20 in 2017, 2018 or 2019 (2020 doesn't count) and they do not look to be very good this year. I do not think there is another program that has fallen off like Duke. Just curious as to why they have dropped off.

One thought would be “did another team steal their thunder/ take their place” but I don’t see it. If Stanford, Vanderbilt, Hopkins or an Ivy other than (Princeton or Penn) was consistently Top 10 or even top 20 I would say maybe they were winning the recruiting battle against Duke. That doesn’t appear to be the case and from what I can tell they still get their fair share of high end recruits. Strange that they have dropped down a notch.

No one does mess with more

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Let’s say it the way it actually is After top 2 it’s a garbage shoot. NW is great but play absolutely no Defense. Norte Dame is also talented but are too busy playing weak teams and over this season and last short season play cupcake schedule but it’s never discussed on here Minus the top two anything is possible. Teams will improve as year goes on with no fall ball more than they ever have Maryland SB BC would not be shocking if these teams made a run. Penn state nah and Florida will have zero top 20 wins on their resume.

Stony Brook is not in the same class as Maryland or BC, they are not in the same class as Florida or Penn State for that matter. As far as Stony Brook the remaining schedule is a joke.
Stony Brook has benefited from a terrific PR Spin machine and the weak schedule they play each year which enabled SBU to show a gaudy regular season record and the players to pad their stats. Look at their record vs Top 10 teams and they come down to earth. That said, SBU is one of the Top 10 - 15 programs but they are on the tail end of that group. BTW. After that group of 10 - 15 there is a big drop off, very few of those teams are competitive with the top teams. There are a hand full of teams that come in and out of the top 20 from time to time but there are 15 - 18 teams that are there just about every year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Let’s say it the way it actually is After top 2 it’s a garbage shoot. NW is great but play absolutely no Defense. Norte Dame is also talented but are too busy playing weak teams and over this season and last short season play cupcake schedule but it’s never discussed on here Minus the top two anything is possible. Teams will improve as year goes on with no fall ball more than they ever have Maryland SB BC would not be shocking if these teams made a run. Penn state nah and Florida will have zero top 20 wins on their resume.

Stony Brook is not in the same class as Maryland or BC, they are not in the same class as Florida or Penn State for that matter. As far as Stony Brook the remaining schedule is a joke.
Stony Brook has benefited from a terrific PR Spin machine and the weak schedule they play each year which enabled SBU to show a gaudy regular season record and the players to pad their stats. Look at their record vs Top 10 teams and they come down to earth. That said, SBU is one of the Top 10 - 15 programs but they are on the tail end of that group. BTW. After that group of 10 - 15 there is a big drop off, very few of those teams are competitive with the top teams. There are a hand full of teams that come in and out of the top 20 from time to time but there are 15 - 18 teams that are there just about every year.

Think the point is would it shock you if SB beat Penn state who they have dismantled in the past and what exactly has " the spun PR machine of BC done to convince you they are better than Sb Was it the 21-9 loss to UNC (btw SB played UNC way better) I do not love nor detest SB but the same points you use against SB you need to use universally My belief is after top 3/4 anyone could beat anyone Teams 4/5 up to 15 in the rankings is depending on the day then yes its a drop. Speaking of schedules check out Florida

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Let’s say it the way it actually is After top 2 it’s a garbage shoot. NW is great but play absolutely no Defense. Norte Dame is also talented but are too busy playing weak teams and over this season and last short season play cupcake schedule but it’s never discussed on here Minus the top two anything is possible. Teams will improve as year goes on with no fall ball more than they ever have Maryland SB BC would not be shocking if these teams made a run. Penn state nah and Florida will have zero top 20 wins on their resume.

I would agree with most of this, it will be survival to the finish line with pauses and cancellations

Funny how the mens lacrosse thread on here is barely posted on you people on here are pathetic

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Let’s say it the way it actually is After top 2 it’s a garbage shoot. NW is great but play absolutely no Defense. Norte Dame is also talented but are too busy playing weak teams and over this season and last short season play cupcake schedule but it’s never discussed on here Minus the top two anything is possible. Teams will improve as year goes on with no fall ball more than they ever have Maryland SB BC would not be shocking if these teams made a run. Penn state nah and Florida will have zero top 20 wins on their resume.

Stony Brook is not in the same class as Maryland or BC, they are not in the same class as Florida or Penn State for that matter. As far as Stony Brook the remaining schedule is a joke.
Stony Brook has benefited from a terrific PR Spin machine and the weak schedule they play each year which enabled SBU to show a gaudy regular season record and the players to pad their stats. Look at their record vs Top 10 teams and they come down to earth. That said, SBU is one of the Top 10 - 15 programs but they are on the tail end of that group. BTW. After that group of 10 - 15 there is a big drop off, very few of those teams are competitive with the top teams. There are a hand full of teams that come in and out of the top 20 from time to time but there are 15 - 18 teams that are there just about every year.

Since 2015 here is how Stony Brook has actually done vs teams that finished the season ranked in the Top 10.

Stony Brook Vs Top 10 Teams........ SBU 7 wins - 14 losses. Pretty sure that puts it all in perspective.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Funny how the mens lacrosse thread on here is barely posted on you people on here are pathetic

Pot meet Kettle...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Let’s say it the way it actually is After top 2 it’s a garbage shoot. NW is great but play absolutely no Defense. Norte Dame is also talented but are too busy playing weak teams and over this season and last short season play cupcake schedule but it’s never discussed on here Minus the top two anything is possible. Teams will improve as year goes on with no fall ball more than they ever have Maryland SB BC would not be shocking if these teams made a run. Penn state nah and Florida will have zero top 20 wins on their resume.

Stony Brook is not in the same class as Maryland or BC, they are not in the same class as Florida or Penn State for that matter. As far as Stony Brook the remaining schedule is a joke.
Stony Brook has benefited from a terrific PR Spin machine and the weak schedule they play each year which enabled SBU to show a gaudy regular season record and the players to pad their stats. Look at their record vs Top 10 teams and they come down to earth. That said, SBU is one of the Top 10 - 15 programs but they are on the tail end of that group. BTW. After that group of 10 - 15 there is a big drop off, very few of those teams are competitive with the top teams. There are a hand full of teams that come in and out of the top 20 from time to time but there are 15 - 18 teams that are there just about every year.

Since 2015 here is how Stony Brook has actually done vs teams that finished the season ranked in the Top 10.

Stony Brook Vs Top 10 Teams........ SBU 7 wins - 14 losses. Pretty sure that puts it all in perspective.

Actually you just made me go back and look and Only did because i thought you would have a jaded angle. It is actually 9 wins vs Top ten but when you dive deeper out of the 12 losses ALL are to teams that finished in the Top5 and all but two to teams that finished top 3 and 5 of the 12 were in NCAA quarterfinals. The deeper dive is actually more impressive. Also think most people that comment on here are from LI so the PR is a little more in our faces. Will say having daughters and a son the social media is large large part of recruiting. Lets just all be glad there is lacrosse and stop the venom spewing. My final 4 is Cuse UNC NW and ND good luck to all

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Let’s say it the way it actually is After top 2 it’s a garbage shoot. NW is great but play absolutely no Defense. Norte Dame is also talented but are too busy playing weak teams and over this season and last short season play cupcake schedule but it’s never discussed on here Minus the top two anything is possible. Teams will improve as year goes on with no fall ball more than they ever have Maryland SB BC would not be shocking if these teams made a run. Penn state nah and Florida will have zero top 20 wins on their resume.

I would agree with most of this, it will be survival to the finish line with pauses and cancellations

Amen

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Let’s say it the way it actually is After top 2 it’s a garbage shoot. NW is great but play absolutely no Defense. Norte Dame is also talented but are too busy playing weak teams and over this season and last short season play cupcake schedule but it’s never discussed on here Minus the top two anything is possible. Teams will improve as year goes on with no fall ball more than they ever have Maryland SB BC would not be shocking if these teams made a run. Penn state nah and Florida will have zero top 20 wins on their resume.

Stony Brook is not in the same class as Maryland or BC, they are not in the same class as Florida or Penn State for that matter. As far as Stony Brook the remaining schedule is a joke.
Stony Brook has benefited from a terrific PR Spin machine and the weak schedule they play each year which enabled SBU to show a gaudy regular season record and the players to pad their stats. Look at their record vs Top 10 teams and they come down to earth. That said, SBU is one of the Top 10 - 15 programs but they are on the tail end of that group. BTW. After that group of 10 - 15 there is a big drop off, very few of those teams are competitive with the top teams. There are a hand full of teams that come in and out of the top 20 from time to time but there are 15 - 18 teams that are there just about every year.

Since 2015 here is how Stony Brook has actually done vs teams that finished the season ranked in the Top 10.

Stony Brook Vs Top 10 Teams........ SBU 7 wins - 14 losses. Pretty sure that puts it all in perspective.

Actually you just made me go back and look and Only did because i thought you would have a jaded angle. It is actually 9 wins vs Top ten but when you dive deeper out of the 12 losses ALL are to teams that finished in the Top5 and all but two to teams that finished top 3 and 5 of the 12 were in NCAA quarterfinals. The deeper dive is actually more impressive. Also think most people that comment on here are from LI so the PR is a little more in our faces. Will say having daughters and a son the social media is large large part of recruiting. Lets just all be glad there is lacrosse and stop the venom spewing. My final 4 is Cuse UNC NW and ND good luck to all

Like the facts and I agree a year ago what we all would of done to be watching lacrosse

Penn state on Big pause next scheduled game 3-19

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Penn state on Big pause next scheduled game 3-19

Daughter at Navy as well shut down

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Let’s say it the way it actually is After top 2 it’s a garbage shoot. NW is great but play absolutely no Defense. Norte Dame is also talented but are too busy playing weak teams and over this season and last short season play cupcake schedule but it’s never discussed on here Minus the top two anything is possible. Teams will improve as year goes on with no fall ball more than they ever have Maryland SB BC would not be shocking if these teams made a run. Penn state nah and Florida will have zero top 20 wins on their resume.

Stony Brook is not in the same class as Maryland or BC, they are not in the same class as Florida or Penn State for that matter. As far as Stony Brook the remaining schedule is a joke.
Stony Brook has benefited from a terrific PR Spin machine and the weak schedule they play each year which enabled SBU to show a gaudy regular season record and the players to pad their stats. Look at their record vs Top 10 teams and they come down to earth. That said, SBU is one of the Top 10 - 15 programs but they are on the tail end of that group. BTW. After that group of 10 - 15 there is a big drop off, very few of those teams are competitive with the top teams. There are a hand full of teams that come in and out of the top 20 from time to time but there are 15 - 18 teams that are there just about every year.

Since 2015 here is how Stony Brook has actually done vs teams that finished the season ranked in the Top 10.

Stony Brook Vs Top 10 Teams........ SBU 7 wins - 14 losses. Pretty sure that puts it all in perspective.

Actually you just made me go back and look and Only did because i thought you would have a jaded angle. It is actually 9 wins vs Top ten but when you dive deeper out of the 12 losses ALL are to teams that finished in the Top5 and all but two to teams that finished top 3 and 5 of the 12 were in NCAA quarterfinals. The deeper dive is actually more impressive. Also think most people that comment on here are from LI so the PR is a little more in our faces. Will say having daughters and a son the social media is large large part of recruiting. Lets just all be glad there is lacrosse and stop the venom spewing. My final 4 is Cuse UNC NW and ND good luck to all

I also went back to check.

Your response is neither accurate or factual and demonstrates the type of spin that is spewed on here with regard to Stony Brook on a regular basis. You accuse the person of having a "jaded angle" when all they did was put up some numbers, there was no angle or spin (although I believe the numbers were off by 1 Win and 1 Loss not what I would call jaded they were simply wrong or inaccurate. You then want to change the subject and with stop the "venom spewing" when the post you were responding to spewed no venom at all. You mad inaccurate statements all in an effort to say how impressive Stony Brooks record was when in fact it is not.

Below are the actual results for Stony Brook since 2015 Vs teams that "finished the season" ranked in the Final Top 10.

2015: 1 - 1
2015 - Beat #6 Northwestern
2015 - Lost #9 Princeton

2016: 1 - 3
2016 - Beat #10 Stanford
2016 - Lost # 6 Florida
2016 - Lost # 5 USC
2016 - Lost # 3 Syracuse

2017: 1 - 2
2017 - Beat # 7 USC
2017 - Lost # 9 Florida
2017 - Lost # 1 Maryland

2018: 2 -1
2018 - Beat # 8 Northwestern
2018 - Beat # 9 Towson
2018 - Lost # 2 Boston College

2019: 0 - 3
2019 - Lost # 8 Denver
2019 - Lost # 6 Princeton
2019 - Lost # 1 Maryland

2020 - 1 - 1
2020 - Beat # 4 Syracuse (not full season)
2020 - Lost # 8 Florida (not full season)

2021: 0 -2
2021 - Lost current # 2 Syracuse
2021 - Lost current # 1 North Carolina

Overall from 2015 to 2021... Stony Brook is 6 wins and 13 losses Vs Top 10 opponents and not "all" of the losses were to teams that finished in the Top 5. Not as impressive as some would have us all believe.

I think the obvious top teams are UNC, Cuse, ND, NW . I think people are counting out Loyola because of their terrible start but that would be a mistake and I bet they are right there by the end of the season. SBU ,Florida have the ability to beat anyone but Florida would need an incredible effort from their goalie ( she has that ability) and win the draw battle to beat a top team as they are very limited offensively. SBU would need to dominate the draw and shoot better to have a chance against one of the top teams .I dont see any other team that realistically could beat one of the top teams unless something very strange happens.

Side note: is the America East conference so devoid of talent that they select a player who went 2 for 8 in shooting with 4 TO and honestly looked a little lost in a close game against an opponent they should easily beat as the offensive player of the week .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Let’s say it the way it actually is After top 2 it’s a garbage shoot. NW is great but play absolutely no Defense. Norte Dame is also talented but are too busy playing weak teams and over this season and last short season play cupcake schedule but it’s never discussed on here Minus the top two anything is possible. Teams will improve as year goes on with no fall ball more than they ever have Maryland SB BC would not be shocking if these teams made a run. Penn state nah and Florida will have zero top 20 wins on their resume.

Stony Brook is not in the same class as Maryland or BC, they are not in the same class as Florida or Penn State for that matter. As far as Stony Brook the remaining schedule is a joke.
Stony Brook has benefited from a terrific PR Spin machine and the weak schedule they play each year which enabled SBU to show a gaudy regular season record and the players to pad their stats. Look at their record vs Top 10 teams and they come down to earth. That said, SBU is one of the Top 10 - 15 programs but they are on the tail end of that group. BTW. After that group of 10 - 15 there is a big drop off, very few of those teams are competitive with the top teams. There are a hand full of teams that come in and out of the top 20 from time to time but there are 15 - 18 teams that are there just about every year.

Think the point is would it shock you if SB beat Penn state who they have dismantled in the past and what exactly has " the spun PR machine of BC done to convince you they are better than Sb Was it the 21-9 loss to UNC (btw SB played UNC way better) I do not love nor detest SB but the same points you use against SB you need to use universally My belief is after top 3/4 anyone could beat anyone Teams 4/5 up to 15 in the rankings is depending on the day then yes its a drop. Speaking of schedules check out Florida

There has definitely been an effort on this site by some to paint a picture and define a narrative for Stony Brook.

When Stony Brook losses it’s “the game was closer than the score indicates”.

When Stony Brook wins it's “the game wasn’t that close” or JS pumped the brakes” or it could have been much worse “.

“they play with a chip on their shoulder” as if they are tougher than all other teams.

“He gets no name recruits and coaches them up”.

The reality is that JS has done a fantastic job and there is no doubt that he is a very good coach. Stony Brook is definitely one of the Top 10 - 15 programs and they have been for several years now. However, they are not one of the Top 5-7 programs over that same timeframe but The SBU Faithful would like to believe they are a Top 5 Program.

I was actually surprised that they did not do better vs Syracuse and UNC this year. Going forward I think lack of competition will have them unprepared come tournament time. Just my opinion.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Let’s say it the way it actually is After top 2 it’s a garbage shoot. NW is great but play absolutely no Defense. Norte Dame is also talented but are too busy playing weak teams and over this season and last short season play cupcake schedule but it’s never discussed on here Minus the top two anything is possible. Teams will improve as year goes on with no fall ball more than they ever have Maryland SB BC would not be shocking if these teams made a run. Penn state nah and Florida will have zero top 20 wins on their resume.

Stony Brook is not in the same class as Maryland or BC, they are not in the same class as Florida or Penn State for that matter. As far as Stony Brook the remaining schedule is a joke.
Stony Brook has benefited from a terrific PR Spin machine and the weak schedule they play each year which enabled SBU to show a gaudy regular season record and the players to pad their stats. Look at their record vs Top 10 teams and they come down to earth. That said, SBU is one of the Top 10 - 15 programs but they are on the tail end of that group. BTW. After that group of 10 - 15 there is a big drop off, very few of those teams are competitive with the top teams. There are a hand full of teams that come in and out of the top 20 from time to time but there are 15 - 18 teams that are there just about every year.

Since 2015 here is how Stony Brook has actually done vs teams that finished the season ranked in the Top 10.

Stony Brook Vs Top 10 Teams........ SBU 7 wins - 14 losses. Pretty sure that puts it all in perspective.

Actually you just made me go back and look and Only did because i thought you would have a jaded angle. It is actually 9 wins vs Top ten but when you dive deeper out of the 12 losses ALL are to teams that finished in the Top5 and all but two to teams that finished top 3 and 5 of the 12 were in NCAA quarterfinals. The deeper dive is actually more impressive. Also think most people that comment on here are from LI so the PR is a little more in our faces. Will say having daughters and a son the social media is large large part of recruiting. Lets just all be glad there is lacrosse and stop the venom spewing. My final 4 is Cuse UNC NW and ND good luck to all

Like the facts and I agree a year ago what we all would of done to be watching lacrosse

The post that you are responding to has no facts.

The Facts are below: ; )

Since 2015 Stony Brook is 6 - 13 Vs The End of Season Top 10.

During that time Stony Brook is 1 - 7 Vs Teams that ended the season ranked #1 - #5.

They are 5 - 6 Vs Teams that ended the season ranked #6 - #10.

Stony Brook is a below .500 Team when competing against Top 10 Teams. Maybe that is good, I don't know.

When you look at how Stony Brook faired Vs teams ranked between #10 - #20 they were 16 - 3 (pretty darn good).

2015 - 2021 ytd, Stony Brook Vs Top 20 they are 22 - 16.

It has been said on this site that Stony Brook should be considered a Top 10 Program for many years. I would agree and I would put them overall at around # 8 behind Maryland, North Carolina, Boston College, Northwestern, Syracuse, Virginia, Princeton and Florida.

No Bias, no venom, no spin, no hype, no detest... Just an assessment based on how Stony Brook has performed when competing against other Top 20 caliber teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

"Unfortunately Stony Brook does not have a very difficult schedule the rest of the way. I realize that it's not their fault but it is what it is. Hofstra might surprise this year, we will see. Not being in competitive game will hurt Stony Brook come Tournament time. My guess is an early exit from the tournament for SBU."

I could see a first round match up against BC as they are fairly regional with BC hitting the exits early. Hofstra will never be successful , they essentially only allow 1 player to shoot the ball ,fairly easy for any team to game plan against.

The Hofstra comment is spot on

Originally Posted by Anonymous

"Unfortunately Stony Brook does not have a very difficult schedule the rest of the way. I realize that it's not their fault but it is what it is. Hofstra might surprise this year, we will see. Not being in competitive game will hurt Stony Brook come Tournament time. My guess is an early exit from the tournament for SBU."

I could see a first round match up against BC as they are fairly regional with BC hitting the exits early. Hofstra will never be successful , they essentially only allow 1 player to shoot the ball ,fairly easy for any team to game plan against.

The Hofstra comment is spot on

Stony Brook comments spot on as well...

Good news from D3. NESCAC schools will begin play in April. Scheduling not out yet. The NESCAC usually occupy at least 7-8 spots in the top 20.

Terrible effort from Hofstra’ yesterday blown out a few days after being ranked Albany took away 7 and team imploded

it was not a good effort. Four hour bus ride along with only 1 practice following a 10 day quarantine/pause with no practice did not help either. Glad no one got hurt. Back to the drawing board.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think the obvious top teams are UNC, Cuse, ND, NW . I think people are counting out Loyola because of their terrible start but that would be a mistake and I bet they are right there by the end of the season. SBU ,Florida have the ability to beat anyone but Florida would need an incredible effort from their goalie ( she has that ability) and win the draw battle to beat a top team as they are very limited offensively. SBU would need to dominate the draw and shoot better to have a chance against one of the top teams .I dont see any other team that realistically could beat one of the top teams unless something very strange happens.

Side note: is the America East conference so devoid of talent that they select a player who went 2 for 8 in shooting with 4 TO and honestly looked a little lost in a close game against an opponent they should easily beat as the offensive player of the week .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think the obvious top teams are UNC, Cuse, ND, NW . I think people are counting out Loyola because of their terrible start but that would be a mistake and I bet they are right there by the end of the season. SBU ,Florida have the ability to beat anyone but Florida would need an incredible effort from their goalie ( she has that ability) and win the draw battle to beat a top team as they are very limited offensively. SBU would need to dominate the draw and shoot better to have a chance against one of the top teams .I dont see any other team that realistically could beat one of the top teams unless something very strange happens.

Side note: is the America East conference so devoid of talent that they select a player who went 2 for 8 in shooting with 4 TO and honestly looked a little lost in a close game against an opponent they should easily beat as the offensive player of the week .

Not sure about Notre Dame, Loyola just does not look good, Stony Brook does not have the ability to beat top teams. Florida does have the ability to challenge for a Final Four spot. SBU was lucky to beat Towson, they should not have easily beat them. Towson actually looked more athletic. SBU a little more confident down the stretch. The difference was SBU expected to win, Towson needs to believe they can beat good teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

it was not a good effort. Four hour bus ride along with only 1 practice following a 10 day quarantine/pause with no practice did not help either. Glad no one got hurt. Back to the drawing board.

That’s what’s funny on this board mommy’s and dadddys hve no clue what goes on w all the testing no fall ball etc

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think the obvious top teams are UNC, Cuse, ND, NW . I think people are counting out Loyola because of their terrible start but that would be a mistake and I bet they are right there by the end of the season. SBU ,Florida have the ability to beat anyone but Florida would need an incredible effort from their goalie ( she has that ability) and win the draw battle to beat a top team as they are very limited offensively. SBU would need to dominate the draw and shoot better to have a chance against one of the top teams .I dont see any other team that realistically could beat one of the top teams unless something very strange happens.

Side note: is the America East conference so devoid of talent that they select a player who went 2 for 8 in shooting with 4 TO and honestly looked a little lost in a close game against an opponent they should easily beat as the offensive player of the week .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think the obvious top teams are UNC, Cuse, ND, NW . I think people are counting out Loyola because of their terrible start but that would be a mistake and I bet they are right there by the end of the season. SBU ,Florida have the ability to beat anyone but Florida would need an incredible effort from their goalie ( she has that ability) and win the draw battle to beat a top team as they are very limited offensively. SBU would need to dominate the draw and shoot better to have a chance against one of the top teams .I dont see any other team that realistically could beat one of the top teams unless something very strange happens.

Side note: is the America East conference so devoid of talent that they select a player who went 2 for 8 in shooting with 4 TO and honestly looked a little lost in a close game against an opponent they should easily beat as the offensive player of the week .

Not sure about Notre Dame, Loyola just does not look good, Stony Brook does not have the ability to beat top teams. Florida does have the ability to challenge for a Final Four spot. SBU was lucky to beat Towson, they should not have easily beat them. Towson actually looked more athletic. SBU a little more confident down the stretch. The difference was SBU expected to win, Towson needs to believe they can beat good teams.

Two things here. I was looking forward to this game and it did not disappoint First off Towson with addition of freshman and multiple transfers are not the Towson we have seen past few years. As far as the game assessment I personally never felt game was in doubt. SB was up 6-2 at half and 10-6 late so as far as “supposed to blow someone out” did you use that while assessing UVA and Louisville Wins are wins especially in a Covid season.
Personally think both teams are really well coached and could beat anyone outside the top two because defense goalie play and a few kids who could get hot
Florida I have seen this year and based on what I’ve seen not sure what makes you more confident about them than some others (unlesssss your daughter plays for them) then I understand UNC CUSE Then the jury is out remember with no fall ball these teams are very much a work in progress and much will change as it goes on.

Instead of wasting time dwelling on the “final 4
How about predicting top 8 teams which are all the host teams for first round NCAA
1. UNC
2. Cuse
3. NW
4. ND
5. MD
6. PS
7. SB
8. Winner CAA/florida

3 ACC 3 big 10 (not sure with Florida due to them not having any top 20 wins

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think the obvious top teams are UNC, Cuse, ND, NW . I think people are counting out Loyola because of their terrible start but that would be a mistake and I bet they are right there by the end of the season. SBU ,Florida have the ability to beat anyone but Florida would need an incredible effort from their goalie ( she has that ability) and win the draw battle to beat a top team as they are very limited offensively. SBU would need to dominate the draw and shoot better to have a chance against one of the top teams .I dont see any other team that realistically could beat one of the top teams unless something very strange happens.

Side note: is the America East conference so devoid of talent that they select a player who went 2 for 8 in shooting with 4 TO and honestly looked a little lost in a close game against an opponent they should easily beat as the offensive player of the week .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think the obvious top teams are UNC, Cuse, ND, NW . I think people are counting out Loyola because of their terrible start but that would be a mistake and I bet they are right there by the end of the season. SBU ,Florida have the ability to beat anyone but Florida would need an incredible effort from their goalie ( she has that ability) and win the draw battle to beat a top team as they are very limited offensively. SBU would need to dominate the draw and shoot better to have a chance against one of the top teams .I dont see any other team that realistically could beat one of the top teams unless something very strange happens.

Side note: is the America East conference so devoid of talent that they select a player who went 2 for 8 in shooting with 4 TO and honestly looked a little lost in a close game against an opponent they should easily beat as the offensive player of the week .

Not sure about Notre Dame, Loyola just does not look good, Stony Brook does not have the ability to beat top teams. Florida does have the ability to challenge for a Final Four spot. SBU was lucky to beat Towson, they should not have easily beat them. Towson actually looked more athletic. SBU a little more confident down the stretch. The difference was SBU expected to win, Towson needs to believe they can beat good teams.

Two things here. I was looking forward to this game and it did not disappoint First off Towson with addition of freshman and multiple transfers are not the Towson we have seen past few years. As far as the game assessment I personally never felt game was in doubt. SB was up 6-2 at half and 10-6 late so as far as “supposed to blow someone out” did you use that while assessing UVA and Louisville Wins are wins especially in a Covid season.
Personally think both teams are really well coached and could beat anyone outside the top two because defense goalie play and a few kids who could get hot
Florida I have seen this year and based on what I’ve seen not sure what makes you more confident about them than some others (unlesssss your daughter plays for them) then I understand UNC CUSE Then the jury is out remember with no fall ball these teams are very much a work in progress and much will change as it goes on.

Watched the game and thought it was a good win for SBU, Towson is a solid team. The Tigers are a player or two away from being a Top 10 team. Stony Brook is also a player or two away from being a Top 10 team. SBU should roll the rest of the way (unless they pick up more games vs quality teams). In this crazy year we don't know what will happen but from what I have seen SBU is not making it to the Quarter Finals (I have been wrong before). I just do not see the depth, Their best (who is terrific) is asked to do too much. Maybe Albany will test them.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Instead of wasting time dwelling on the “final 4
How about predicting top 8 teams which are all the host teams for first round NCAA
1. UNC
2. Cuse
3. NW
4. ND
5. MD
6. PS
7. SB
8. Winner CAA/florida

3 ACC 3 big 10 (not sure with Florida due to them not having any top 20 wins

I'm going with BC over SBU and Florida over the CAA Champ.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Instead of wasting time dwelling on the “final 4
How about predicting top 8 teams which are all the host teams for first round NCAA
1. UNC
2. Cuse
3. NW
4. ND
5. MD
6. PS
7. SB
8. Winner CAA/florida

3 ACC 3 big 10 (not sure with Florida due to them not having any top 20 wins

I'm going with BC over SBU and Florida over the CAA Champ.

Thought about that but BC could have 6 plus conf losses and florida will have zero quality wins

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Instead of wasting time dwelling on the “final 4
How about predicting top 8 teams which are all the host teams for first round NCAA
1. UNC
2. Cuse
3. NW
4. ND
5. MD
6. PS
7. SB
8. Winner CAA/florida

3 ACC 3 big 10 (not sure with Florida due to them not having any top 20 wins

I'm going with BC over SBU and Florida over the CAA Champ.

Would love to see some new blood surprise the traditional powers. It was fun to see JMU win the National Championship and it was great when Navy made it to The Final Four. Are there any teams out there with a shot at breaking in?

Florida played UNC better than other team so far. They had a great game plan to keep UNC two superstars on offense under control. The UF goalie played great. But so did UNCs D and goalie. It was 4-3 at half and 11-5 final.
The issue is as pointed out UF doesn’t play anybody going forward to improve. If I was MO I would be hunting down a few more teams, even reschedule Loyola and play Towson etc. well there.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think the obvious top teams are UNC, Cuse, ND, NW . I think people are counting out Loyola because of their terrible start but that would be a mistake and I bet they are right there by the end of the season. SBU ,Florida have the ability to beat anyone but Florida would need an incredible effort from their goalie ( she has that ability) and win the draw battle to beat a top team as they are very limited offensively. SBU would need to dominate the draw and shoot better to have a chance against one of the top teams .I dont see any other team that realistically could beat one of the top teams unless something very strange happens.

Side note: is the America East conference so devoid of talent that they select a player who went 2 for 8 in shooting with 4 TO and honestly looked a little lost in a close game against an opponent they should easily beat as the offensive player of the week .

Not sure about Notre Dame, Loyola just does not look good, Stony Brook does not have the ability to beat top teams. Florida does have the ability to challenge for a Final Four spot. SBU was lucky to beat Towson, they should not have easily beat them. Towson actually looked more athletic. SBU a little more confident down the stretch. The difference was SBU expected to win, Towson needs to believe they can beat good teams.[/quote]

Two things here. I was looking forward to this game and it did not disappoint First off Towson with addition of freshman and multiple transfers are not the Towson we have seen past few years. As far as the game assessment I personally never felt game was in doubt. SB was up 6-2 at half and 10-6 late so as far as “supposed to blow someone out” did you use that while assessing UVA and Louisville Wins are wins especially in a Covid season.
Personally think both teams are really well coached and could beat anyone outside the top two because defense goalie play and a few kids who could get hot
Florida I have seen this year and based on what I’ve seen not sure what makes you more confident about them than some others (unlesssss your daughter plays for them) then I understand UNC CUSE Then the jury is out remember with no fall ball these teams are very much a work in progress and much will change as it goes on.[/quote]

Why would you put "supposed to blow someone out " in quotes. The statement said easily beat which I take to mean win by 4-7 goals and not trailing or tied in the second half. I would say Florida and SBU are in that 5-10 area and either one could beat anyone but it would be a major upset if they beat Cuse or UNC.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think the obvious top teams are UNC, Cuse, ND, NW . I think people are counting out Loyola because of their terrible start but that would be a mistake and I bet they are right there by the end of the season. SBU ,Florida have the ability to beat anyone but Florida would need an incredible effort from their goalie ( she has that ability) and win the draw battle to beat a top team as they are very limited offensively. SBU would need to dominate the draw and shoot better to have a chance against one of the top teams .I dont see any other team that realistically could beat one of the top teams unless something very strange happens.

Side note: is the America East conference so devoid of talent that they select a player who went 2 for 8 in shooting with 4 TO and honestly looked a little lost in a close game against an opponent they should easily beat as the offensive player of the week .

Not sure about Notre Dame, Loyola just does not look good, Stony Brook does not have the ability to beat top teams. Florida does have the ability to challenge for a Final Four spot. SBU was lucky to beat Towson, they should not have easily beat them. Towson actually looked more athletic. SBU a little more confident down the stretch. The difference was SBU expected to win, Towson needs to believe they can beat good teams.

Two things here. I was looking forward to this game and it did not disappoint First off Towson with addition of freshman and multiple transfers are not the Towson we have seen past few years. As far as the game assessment I personally never felt game was in doubt. SB was up 6-2 at half and 10-6 late so as far as “supposed to blow someone out” did you use that while assessing UVA and Louisville Wins are wins especially in a Covid season.
Personally think both teams are really well coached and could beat anyone outside the top two because defense goalie play and a few kids who could get hot
Florida I have seen this year and based on what I’ve seen not sure what makes you more confident about them than some others (unlesssss your daughter plays for them) then I understand UNC CUSE Then the jury is out remember with no fall ball these teams are very much a work in progress and much will change as it goes on.[/quote]

Why would you put "supposed to blow someone out " in quotes. The statement said easily beat which I take to mean win by 4-7 goals and not trailing or tied in the second half. I would say Florida and SBU are in that 5-10 area and either one could beat anyone but it would be a major upset if they beat Cuse or UNC.[/quote]

Don't think Stony Brook is in the 5 - 10 range this year. I realize that SBU is ranked in the Top 10 right now and due to their schedule that is not likely to change but eventually they will have to beat a quality team in order to do better in the Tournament. If they are Top 6 seed it will certainly help. Having the Bye on Friday is a huge advantage.

The below rant is cut and paste from the boy's side... Although a bit to cynical for me there is some truth to what is said. I think we are a long way from parity on the women's side as well and "granting four classes" of players an extra year of eligibility will only help the rich get richer. Sure, some other programs will benefit but for the most part it will be the top programs that benefit most. The top programs consistently bring in the best recruits now they will not only have their best players stay for an extra year they are likely to bring in stud transfers too. Not good for the sport.

------------

"Will everyone stop with this 'parity' nonsense!

Some mid-major teams showed promise a few years ago and it became more of a catch phrase than 'grow the game'. It's phrases like these that are designed to keep the the industry and money flowing. Respect or Honor the game would've done much more for the game. The growth is about money and will always be about money. About travel clubs and directors ripping off parents. About merchandising and sales.

Parity is just the next catch word to try to keep the dream alive, the industry moving and maintaining commentator jobs all while taking money out of your pockets. You think parity exists? Stop kidding yourself. This past year of extra eligibility has created nothing more than 4-6 super teams that will last for the next few decades. Mid-majors will never catch them.

Parity and grow the game have only done one thing. The rich get richer and the politics last longer.

Look at the rosters and the private school origins. It's about the college coaches praising your son in order to get you to meet prospect day dollars, telling you and the immediate family to come up for a private tour, and stay over Sunday night with a player into Monday, but ignoring you all weekend and the visit doesn't happen.

If that hasn't sunk in, try remembering the IL/USL articles that literally mention the 25-26 year old seniors or grad students. Still don't get it? Ok how about this. If your son is a D1 talent, you better take a close look of your family's financial profile. If it's not great, you're out. Because the 2nd tier of recruits is "pay all tuition+university donor" and the 3rd tier is "pay all tuition"...even if that recruit isn't as good as your young public school stud.

This will all hit you like a freight train, just remember to to laugh through the pain when you see a kid from 'Jesuit Money High School' commit to a mid-tier state university. Because a few weeks later, you'll be walking out of the lacrosse fog smiling knowing you finally got out of the system and your kid is going to have an awesome college experience and future with normalcy."

Any of the big LI college freshman starting quick in college?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any of the big LI college freshman starting quick in college?

Yes, they are all doing great.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any of the big LI college freshman starting quick in college?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any of the big LI college freshman starting quick in college?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any of the big LI college freshman starting quick in college?

Yes, they are all doing great.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any of the big LI college freshman starting quick in college?

Yes, they are all doing great.

What do you consider big 5-8 , 5-9 ?

Loyola struggling with Gtown. Might be a all around tough year for them.

If there was ever a year to not over react with scores it is this one. COVID testing sooo many injuries

Add the fact teams missing so much time w no fall ball and quarantining. Making the most of it but athletically its a lost year. Trying to make it through the season as healthy as possible.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any of the big LI college freshman starting quick in college?

Yes, they are all doing great.

Not ALL!!! Some glaringly so

[quote=Anonymous]Any of the big LI college freshman starting quick in college?

Syracuse, Virginia, Stony Brook, BC, Florida all have freshman that have had fast starts.

Coaches Poll - March 8, 2021

1 - North Carolina
2 - Syracuse
3 - Northwestern
4 - Notre Dame
5 - Florida
6 - Stony Brook
7 - Penn State
8 - Virginia
9 - Maryland
10 - Boston College
11 - Duke
12 - Towson
13 - Virginia Tech
14 - Loyola Maryland
15 - Michigan
16 - Rutgers
17 - Richmond
18 - Navy
19 - Louisville
20 - Southern California
21 - Stanford
22 - Denver
23 - James Madison
24 - Drexel
25 - Elon
RV - Johns Hopkins
RV - Ohio State
RV - Colorado

Top 5 look good.
Stony Brook should not be Top 10. Stony Brook at 6 is a Joke.
Duke, Towson and Loyola should not be Top 15.
No need to Rank Top 25. Stick to the Top 20.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Coaches Poll - March 8, 2021

1 - North Carolina
2 - Syracuse
3 - Northwestern
4 - Notre Dame
5 - Florida
6 - Stony Brook
7 - Penn State
8 - Virginia
9 - Maryland
10 - Boston College
11 - Duke
12 - Towson
13 - Virginia Tech
14 - Loyola Maryland
15 - Michigan
16 - Rutgers
17 - Richmond
18 - Navy
19 - Louisville
20 - Southern California
21 - Stanford
22 - Denver
23 - James Madison
24 - Drexel
25 - Elon
RV - Johns Hopkins
RV - Ohio State
RV - Colorado

Top 5 look good.
Stony Brook should not be Top 10. Stony Brook at 6 is a Joke.
Duke, Towson and Loyola should not be Top 15.
No need to Rank Top 25. Stick to the Top 20.

Notre Dame has done nothing to prove they are #4 but who else can you put there?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Coaches Poll - March 8, 2021

1 - North Carolina
2 - Syracuse
3 - Northwestern
4 - Notre Dame
5 - Florida
6 - Stony Brook
7 - Penn State
8 - Virginia
9 - Maryland
10 - Boston College
11 - Duke
12 - Towson
13 - Virginia Tech
14 - Loyola Maryland
15 - Michigan
16 - Rutgers
17 - Richmond
18 - Navy
19 - Louisville
20 - Southern California
21 - Stanford
22 - Denver
23 - James Madison
24 - Drexel
25 - Elon
RV - Johns Hopkins
RV - Ohio State
RV - Colorado

Top 5 look good.
Stony Brook should not be Top 10. Stony Brook at 6 is a Joke.
Duke, Towson and Loyola should not be Top 15.
No need to Rank Top 25. Stick to the Top 20.

Other than Penn State I dont think you can make a case for any other team to be put ahead of SBU. I would move UVA down to 11 .Other than that it looks pretty good.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Coaches Poll - March 8, 2021

1 - North Carolina
2 - Syracuse
3 - Northwestern
4 - Notre Dame
5 - Florida
6 - Stony Brook
7 - Penn State
8 - Virginia
9 - Maryland
10 - Boston College
11 - Duke
12 - Towson
13 - Virginia Tech
14 - Loyola Maryland
15 - Michigan
16 - Rutgers
17 - Richmond
18 - Navy
19 - Louisville
20 - Southern California
21 - Stanford
22 - Denver
23 - James Madison
24 - Drexel
25 - Elon
RV - Johns Hopkins
RV - Ohio State
RV - Colorado

Top 5 look good.
Stony Brook should not be Top 10. Stony Brook at 6 is a Joke.
Duke, Towson and Loyola should not be Top 15.
No need to Rank Top 25. Stick to the Top 20.

Other than Penn State I dont think you can make a case for any other team to be put ahead of SBU. I would move UVA down to 11 .Other than that it looks pretty good.

Agree, Penn State to 6, maybe even 5... who knows they will only play Big 10 schedule so we will not know until NCAA Tournament if the Big 10 Teams are for real.

Do you really think Duke is Top 10? How about Towson at 11? Towson just got blown out by Temple (the score was 12 - 4 with about 5min let in game). Loyola is not Top 15 right now.

At this point why cant we see Temple, Drexel, Uconn, Albany, Elon in the Top 20?

They just keep putting the usual suspects in. Was the Albany win over Hofstra a fluke or is Albany strong this year? Looking forward to the Hofstra Vs Stony Brook game as well as the two Albany Vs Stony Brook games.

Everyone talked with my daughters future college coach and after speaking with her it’s crazy what these coaches and players are dealing with. It is so much more than lacrosse. One thing she said that stuck in my head was “this is all day to day I would never over react to any scores you see because there is so much going on behind the scenes

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Everyone talked with my daughters future college coach and after speaking with her it’s crazy what these coaches and players are dealing with. It is so much more than lacrosse. One thing she said that stuck in my head was “this is all day to day I would never over react to any scores you see because there is so much going on behind the scenes

It is what it is.... Have to base rankings and Tournament Selections and seeding on something or they might as well just Crown UNC the Champion... I will be interesting to see what happens come selection time.

Penn State Vs Northwestern today at 4:00

Notre Dame Vs Syracuse tonight at 7:00

The Tewaaraton watch list posted and honestly what a joke. First off way too many players and they have a middy who has played in a total of 9 games starting in 3 .Stats are 10 g,1A, 11 T.O yes she has done well at the draw but give me a break.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The Tewaaraton watch list posted and honestly what a joke. First off way too many players and they have a middy who has played in a total of 9 games starting in 3 .Stats are 10 g,1A, 11 T.O yes she has done well at the draw but give me a break.

Wow. Talk about time on your hands!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The Tewaaraton watch list posted and honestly what a joke. First off way too many players and they have a middy who has played in a total of 9 games starting in 3 .Stats are 10 g,1A, 11 T.O yes she has done well at the draw but give me a break.

Eh, I tend to agree but In the end everybody knows their will be a short list, but it's nice for the players to be recognized.

Ok. Watched a few games first few weeks here. Is there a defensive of coach in women’s lacrosse that understands terms:
Show Slide
Shade to ball side/player with ball
Push to alley or any players tendencies.
Play ball side on cutter
Play under the pick

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The Tewaaraton watch list posted and honestly what a joke. First off way too many players and they have a middy who has played in a total of 9 games starting in 3 .Stats are 10 g,1A, 11 T.O yes she has done well at the draw but give me a break.

Wow. Talk about time on your hands!

That coming from someone who so busy that they are on here at 4:00pm on a Thursday.

The list always starts at 50, each week the list gets smaller until there are just 4.. it happens this way every year..

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Coaches Poll - March 8, 2021

1 - North Carolina
2 - Syracuse
3 - Northwestern
4 - Notre Dame
5 - Florida
6 - Stony Brook
7 - Penn State
8 - Virginia
9 - Maryland
10 - Boston College
11 - Duke
12 - Towson
13 - Virginia Tech
14 - Loyola Maryland
15 - Michigan
16 - Rutgers
17 - Richmond
18 - Navy
19 - Louisville
20 - Southern California
21 - Stanford
22 - Denver
23 - James Madison
24 - Drexel
25 - Elon
RV - Johns Hopkins
RV - Ohio State
RV - Colorado

Top 5 look good.
Stony Brook should not be Top 10. Stony Brook at 6 is a Joke.
Duke, Towson and Loyola should not be Top 15.
No need to Rank Top 25. Stick to the Top 20.

Other than Penn State I dont think you can make a case for any other team to be put ahead of SBU. I would move UVA down to 11 .Other than that it looks pretty good.

Disagree, might even put Virginia ahead of Stony Brook.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Coaches Poll - March 8, 2021

1 - North Carolina
2 - Syracuse
3 - Northwestern
4 - Notre Dame
5 - Florida
6 - Stony Brook
7 - Penn State
8 - Virginia
9 - Maryland
10 - Boston College
11 - Duke
12 - Towson
13 - Virginia Tech
14 - Loyola Maryland
15 - Michigan
16 - Rutgers
17 - Richmond
18 - Navy
19 - Louisville
20 - Southern California
21 - Stanford
22 - Denver
23 - James Madison
24 - Drexel
25 - Elon
RV - Johns Hopkins
RV - Ohio State
RV - Colorado

Top 5 look good.
Stony Brook should not be Top 10. Stony Brook at 6 is a Joke.
Duke, Towson and Loyola should not be Top 15.
No need to Rank Top 25. Stick to the Top 20.

Other than Penn State I dont think you can make a case for any other team to be put ahead of SBU. I would move UVA down to 11 .Other than that it looks pretty good.

Disagree, might even put Virginia ahead of Stony Brook.

After UVA loses by at least a touchdown to BC who SBU has clearly outplayed against common opponents will you come back on .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Coaches Poll - March 8, 2021

1 - North Carolina
2 - Syracuse
3 - Northwestern
4 - Notre Dame
5 - Florida
6 - Stony Brook
7 - Penn State
8 - Virginia
9 - Maryland
10 - Boston College
11 - Duke
12 - Towson
13 - Virginia Tech
14 - Loyola Maryland
15 - Michigan
16 - Rutgers
17 - Richmond
18 - Navy
19 - Louisville
20 - Southern California
21 - Stanford
22 - Denver
23 - James Madison
24 - Drexel
25 - Elon
RV - Johns Hopkins
RV - Ohio State
RV - Colorado

Top 5 look good.
Stony Brook should not be Top 10. Stony Brook at 6 is a Joke.
Duke, Towson and Loyola should not be Top 15.
No need to Rank Top 25. Stick to the Top 20.

Other than Penn State I dont think you can make a case for any other team to be put ahead of SBU. I would move UVA down to 11 .Other than that it looks pretty good.

Disagree, might even put Virginia ahead of Stony Brook.

After UVA loses by at least a touchdown to BC who SBU has clearly outplayed against common opponents will you come back on .

Just curious, what has Stony Brook ever done? They beat up on their conference foes , they do OK vs other Top 20 teams, they are below .500 Vs Top 10 teams, they have won exactly 1 game ever Vs a Top 5 Team and they have done nothing in the NCAA Tournament. Has history not taught us anything? Stony Brook is overrated just about every year and NCAA tournament history usually shows it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Coaches Poll - March 8, 2021

1 - North Carolina
2 - Syracuse
3 - Northwestern
4 - Notre Dame
5 - Florida
6 - Stony Brook
7 - Penn State
8 - Virginia
9 - Maryland
10 - Boston College
11 - Duke
12 - Towson
13 - Virginia Tech
14 - Loyola Maryland
15 - Michigan
16 - Rutgers
17 - Richmond
18 - Navy
19 - Louisville
20 - Southern California
21 - Stanford
22 - Denver
23 - James Madison
24 - Drexel
25 - Elon
RV - Johns Hopkins
RV - Ohio State
RV - Colorado

Top 5 look good.
Stony Brook should not be Top 10. Stony Brook at 6 is a Joke.
Duke, Towson and Loyola should not be Top 15.
No need to Rank Top 25. Stick to the Top 20.

Other than Penn State I dont think you can make a case for any other team to be put ahead of SBU. I would move UVA down to 11 .Other than that it looks pretty good.

Disagree, might even put Virginia ahead of Stony Brook.

Did the one goal win over Louisville do it for you lol just let things play out

This cuse ND game was disappointing game was NEVER in question. Late back door cover but ND got handled Down big early and game was never close. Great game by Cuse

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This cuse ND game was disappointing game was NEVER in question. Late back door cover but ND got handled Down big early and game was never close. Great game by Cuse

Agree that the game was never in question, but have to admit ND is not as overrated as I thought. They have great size and a terrific feeder with a very potent offense and goalie.

SU looked awesome. They will be tough to beat.

On a side note. The biggest game of the year to date and this is the best US Lacrosse has to offer for refs. The SU v ND game was the worse ref and controlled game I have ever seen. I am shocked that a game they knew was going to tuned into they would let these rookies. US lacrosse continues to underwhelm me with their product. Sorry guys this has nothing to do with growth of game. At travel U 9 tourney I get it. Here no way. Based on all the youth watching last night HS and youth cross checking will be on the raise.

The flow of game was terrible based on all the brutal cross check to only disrupt play. Intentional.

I had to switch from the Men’s game last
Nighy to see some great hits in the women’s-lol.

They need to do better!!!!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This cuse ND game was disappointing game was NEVER in question. Late back door cover but ND got handled Down big early and game was never close. Great game by Cuse

Agree that the game was never in question, but have to admit ND is not as overrated as I thought. They have great size and a terrific feeder with a very potent offense and goalie.

"Great size" ? That will take them far.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

SU looked awesome. They will be tough to beat.

On a side note. The biggest game of the year to date and this is the best US Lacrosse has to offer for refs. The SU v ND game was the worse ref and controlled game I have ever seen. I am shocked that a game they knew was going to tuned into they would let these rookies. US lacrosse continues to underwhelm me with their product. Sorry guys this has nothing to do with growth of game. At travel U 9 tourney I get it. Here no way. Based on all the youth watching last night HS and youth cross checking will be on the raise.

The flow of game was terrible based on all the brutal cross check to only disrupt play. Intentional.

I had to switch from the Men’s game last
Nighy to see some great hits in the women’s-lol.

They need to do better!!!!!

Does US Lacrosse have anything to do with the officials who are selected to work NCAA games? Not being cynical, I honestly do not know. I would think for in conference games "the conference" in this case the ACC would assign the officiating crew.

The consensus on this sight has been accurate. UNC, Syracuse and Northwestern are in a class all by themselves. Depth, athleticism, talent, veterans, you name it they have it. Notre Dame and Penn State are both very good teams but at this point they have a lot of work to do if they expect to knock one of the three off. I thought PSU was holding their own and then the wheels came off, PSU goalie had a tough day, I am not sure if she was off or NU shooters are just really good (probably a combination of both). In any event, both PSU and Notre Dame look better other teams that I have seen (just one guys opinion). Athletic, fast, gritty overall very solid.

Boston College Vs Virginia should be interesting.

Top 3 - no particular order... Northwestern, Syracuse, North Carolina.

Next 7 - no particular order... Notre Dame, Florida, Penn State, Maryland, Boston College, Virginia, Stony Brook.

I think Florida and Stony Brook are at a disadvantage due to their less than competitive schedules. Maybe they can schedule a game Vs each other. The ACC and Big 10 teams will certainly be battle tested come Tournament Time.

Good Luck to all.

No one talking about how penn state got pummeled

[quote=Anonymous]No one talking about how penn state got pummeled

The wheels came off in the 2nd half. Very competitive game in the first half.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

No one talking about how penn state got pummeled

Wow, what an insightful post, thanks for sharing...

BTW... Looks like the post directly above your post talks about it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

No one talking about how penn state got pummeled

Wow, what an insightful post, thanks for sharing...

BTW... Looks like the post directly above your post talks about it.

If you watched the game, Penn State actually look pretty good (obviously not as good as NU). It was 11 - 9 (11 - 10 early second half) competitive game and most of the stats were similar with the exception of shooting percentage, save percentage and of course the most important stat "goals scored". Northwestern can really shoot.

Northwestern is a veteran heavy squad, they start two 5th year players (one who is an All-American Transfer from Virginia who scored 4 goals), 5 seniors, 3 juniors, 1 sophomore and 1 freshmen.

Penn State is very young. PSU starts 4 freshmen, 3 sophomores, 2 juniors, 2 seniors, one 5th year (no stud transfers).

Penn State will be fine and they will continue improve as the season goes on.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any of the big LI college freshman starting quick in college?

Watched Northwestern Vs Penn State and the only Freshmen starting for NU is a Freshmen from Long Island. Very impressive. Any freshmen who starts / plays every game on a Top 10 Team (especially one loaded with upperclassmen) is off to a very impressive start. Congratulations to her!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

No one talking about how penn state got pummeled

Wow, what an insightful post, thanks for sharing...

BTW... Looks like the post directly above your post talks about it.

If you watched the game, Penn State actually look pretty good (obviously not as good as NU). It was 11 - 9 (11 - 10 early second half) competitive game and most of the stats were similar with the exception of shooting percentage, save percentage and of course the most important stat "goals scored". Northwestern can really shoot.

Northwestern is a veteran heavy squad, they start two 5th year players (one who is an All-American Transfer from Virginia who scored 4 goals), 5 seniors, 3 juniors, 1 sophomore and 1 freshmen.

Penn State is very young. PSU starts 4 freshmen, 3 sophomores, 2 juniors, 2 seniors, one 5th year (no stud transfers).

Penn State will be fine and they will continue improve as the season goes on.

Signed Penn State Dad. That's one way to look at it or you can say NW woke up in the second half and put a beat down on a lesser team.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

No one talking about how penn state got pummeled

Wow, what an insightful post, thanks for sharing...

BTW... Looks like the post directly above your post talks about it.

If you watched the game, Penn State actually look pretty good (obviously not as good as NU). It was 11 - 9 (11 - 10 early second half) competitive game and most of the stats were similar with the exception of shooting percentage, save percentage and of course the most important stat "goals scored". Northwestern can really shoot.

Northwestern is a veteran heavy squad, they start two 5th year players (one who is an All-American Transfer from Virginia who scored 4 goals), 5 seniors, 3 juniors, 1 sophomore and 1 freshmen.

Penn State is very young. PSU starts 4 freshmen, 3 sophomores, 2 juniors, 2 seniors, one 5th year (no stud transfers).

Penn State will be fine and they will continue improve as the season goes on.

Signed Penn State Dad. That's one way to look at it or you can say NW woke up in the second half and put a beat down on a lesser team.

Not the person you are responding to but will chime in anyway.

You should have signed, but I am sure that you never would. The other way to look at it is you woke up this morning and you were the same as you were yesterday. Go back under the rock troll.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

No one talking about how penn state got pummeled

Wow, what an insightful post, thanks for sharing...

BTW... Looks like the post directly above your post talks about it.

If you watched the game, Penn State actually look pretty good (obviously not as good as NU). It was 11 - 9 (11 - 10 early second half) competitive game and most of the stats were similar with the exception of shooting percentage, save percentage and of course the most important stat "goals scored". Northwestern can really shoot.

Northwestern is a veteran heavy squad, they start two 5th year players (one who is an All-American Transfer from Virginia who scored 4 goals), 5 seniors, 3 juniors, 1 sophomore and 1 freshmen.

Penn State is very young. PSU starts 4 freshmen, 3 sophomores, 2 juniors, 2 seniors, one 5th year (no stud transfers).

Penn State will be fine and they will continue improve as the season goes on.

Signed Penn State Dad. That's one way to look at it or you can say NW woke up in the second half and put a beat down on a lesser team.

Not the person you are responding to but will chime in anyway.

You should have signed, but I am sure that you never would. The other way to look at it is you woke up this morning and you were the same as you were yesterday. Go back under the rock troll.

penn state is not good

So much Penn State chatter lately, I guess with a few more local girls headed there, it is to be expected. I don't think they are a bad team, or a "not good" team, as someone has stated. I do think there are definitely over ranked right now. They are over ranked because they beat a MD team that was way over ranked at the time and it catapulted them from unranked at the start of the season into the bottom of the top ten. Which seems like it makes sense except we have now seen MD has not returned to there usual top of the heap, so that win really should not have launched Penn States ranking. If a unranked team beats MD now, they wouldn't see that jump into the top 10 rankings. I still think SBU, FL, VA, BC, probably Towson any maybe even a few others should be ahead of Penn State. They do belong in the 10-20 range, along with 10 other teams and you could pretty much shuffle the deck at that point, and MD should be considered in that mix as well at this point.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So much Penn State chatter lately, I guess with a few more local girls headed there, it is to be expected. I don't think they are a bad team, or a "not good" team, as someone has stated. I do think there are definitely over ranked right now. They are over ranked because they beat a MD team that was way over ranked at the time and it catapulted them from unranked at the start of the season into the bottom of the top ten. Which seems like it makes sense except we have now seen MD has not returned to there usual top of the heap, so that win really should not have launched Penn States ranking. If a unranked team beats MD now, they wouldn't see that jump into the top 10 rankings. I still think SBU, FL, VA, BC, probably Towson any maybe even a few others should be ahead of Penn State. They do belong in the 10-20 range, along with 10 other teams and you could pretty much shuffle the deck at that point, and MD should be considered in that mix as well at this point.

Get a grip, Towson was just blown out by Temple, Stony Brook struggled with Towson. Florida , Virginia and BC are right there with Penn State. Stony Brook and Towson not so much.

Maryland just stole one from Hopkins in OT. MD loss to PSU OT vs unbanked Hopkins they are not a top 10 team IMO

A few snubs, A few "how'd that happen"s
A ton of LI girls representing, great to see!
No list is complete without controversy.

Congrats to all on the list!

2021 WOMEN’S WATCH LIST
Andie Aldave, Notre Dame - Sr., Midfield
Ali Baiocco, Stanford - Sr., Attack
Caroline Blalock, Louisville - Sr., Midfield
Megan Carney, Syracuse - Jr., Attack
Kasey Choma, Notre Dame - Soph., Midfield
Lizzie Colson, Maryland - Grad. Student, Defense
Sarah Cooper, Syracuse - Jr., Defense
Aurora Cordingley, Johns Hopkins - Sr., Attack
Bridget Deehan, Notre Dame - Sr., Goalie
Kerry Defliese, Syracuse - Grad. Student, Defense
Sondra Dickey, Lehigh - Grad. Student, Midfield
Olivia Dirks, Penn State - Soph., Midfield
Molly Dougherty, James Madison - Jr., Goalie
Annie Dyson, Virginia - Jr., Midfield
Sam Fiedler, Loyola - Sr., Midfield
Molly Garrett, Michigan - Grad. Student, Midfield
Sam Geiersbach, Richmond - RS Sr., Attack
Lauren Gilbert, Northwestern - Sr., Attack
[ChillLaxin] Goldstock, Syracuse - Grad. Student, Goalie
Brindi Griffin, Maryland - Fifth Year, Attack
Grace Griffin, Maryland - Sr., Midfield
Scottie Rose Growney, North Carolina - Sr., Attack
Karson Harris, Drexel - Sr., Midfield
Liza Hernandez, Ohio State - Grad. Student, Attack
Katie Hoeg, North Carolina - Sr., Attack
Abby Hormes, High Point - Sr., Attack
Maddie Jenner, Duke - Jr., Attack
Emma Johnson, James Madison - Sr., Defense
Shannon Kavanagh, Florida - Sr., Midfield
Ally Kennedy , Stony Brook - Grad. Student, Midfield
Molly Little, Denver - 5th Year Sr, Defense
Ashlyn McGovern, Virginia - Jr., Attack
Lindsay McKone, Northwestern - Grad. Student, Attack
Taylor Moreno, North Carolina - Sr., Goalie
Sammy Mueller, Northwestern - Grad. Student, Midfield
Caitlin Muir, Michigan - Sr., Attack
Charlotte North, Boston College - Sr., Attack
Taryn Ohlmiller , Stony Brook - Grad. Student, Attack
Jamie Ortega, North Carolina - Sr., Attack
Alyssa Parrella, Hofstra - Sr., Attack
Blair Pearre, Towson - Soph., Midfield
Paige Petty, Virginia Tech - Sr., Midfield
Kole Pollock, Adelphi - Grad. Student, Attack
Sarah Reznick, Florida - RS Fr., Goalie
Kathleen Roe, Notre Dame - Grad. Student, Defense
Gabby Rosenzweig, Duke - Grad. Student, Attack
Livy Rosenzweig, Loyola - Sr., Attack
Izzy Scane, Northwestern - Jr., Attack
Cassidy Spilis, Rutgers - Soph., Midfield
Taylor Suplee, Penn State - Soph., Goalie
Emma Trenchard, North Carolina - Sr., Defense
Cara Trombetta, Florida - Grad. Student, Defense
Meaghan Tyrrell, Syracuse - Jr., Attack
Cara Urbank, Boston College - Grad. Student, Attack
Nicole Victory, Navy - Sr., Attack
Mikaela Watson, Stanford - Grad. Student, Midfield
Sydney Watson, UConn - Sr., Midfield

“You should have signed, but I am sure that you never would. The other way to look at it is you woke up this morning and you were the same as you were yesterday. Go back under the rock troll.”

Let me guess you are a different person than you were yesterday , most likely a different pronoun something like they .I notice you did not sign your name tough guy ,

If you watched the game, Penn State actually look pretty good (obviously not as good as NU). It was 11 - 9 (11 - 10 early second half) competitive game and most of the stats were similar with the exception of shooting percentage, save percentage and of course the most important stat "goals scored". Northwestern can really shoot.

Northwestern is a veteran heavy squad, they start two 5th year players (one who is an All-American Transfer from Virginia who scored 4 goals), 5 seniors, 3 juniors, 1 sophomore and 1 freshmen.

Penn State is very young. PSU starts 4 freshmen, 3 sophomores, 2 juniors, 2 seniors, one 5th year (no stud transfers).

Penn State will be fine and they will continue improve as the season goes on.[/quote]

Signed Penn State Dad. That's one way to look at it or you can say NW woke up in the second half and put a beat down on a lesser team.[/quote]

Not the person you are responding to but will chime in anyway.

You should have signed, but I am sure that you never would. The other way to look at it is you woke up this morning and you were the same as you were yesterday. Go back under the rock troll.[/quote]

Signed the Penn State dads boyfriend . You should have signed your name Mr football coach fake tough guy .

Agree . MD offense looks disconnected and they don’t do well in set offense situations The commentator kept making comment Reese doesn’t go deep on her bench. Maybe she should. Try anything because what you have out there isn’t getting it done. We are 4 games into the season and your offense hasn’t gelled.If Hopkins would have made a couple of free positions they would have won. UMD seems to rely on free positions. Northwestern is gong to kill them .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So much Penn State chatter lately, I guess with a few more local girls headed there, it is to be expected. I don't think they are a bad team, or a "not good" team, as someone has stated. I do think there are definitely over ranked right now. They are over ranked because they beat a MD team that was way over ranked at the time and it catapulted them from unranked at the start of the season into the bottom of the top ten. Which seems like it makes sense except we have now seen MD has not returned to there usual top of the heap, so that win really should not have launched Penn States ranking. If a unranked team beats MD now, they wouldn't see that jump into the top 10 rankings. I still think SBU, FL, VA, BC, probably Towson any maybe even a few others should be ahead of Penn State. They do belong in the 10-20 range, along with 10 other teams and you could pretty much shuffle the deck at that point, and MD should be considered in that mix as well at this point.

Get a grip, Towson was just blown out by Temple, Stony Brook struggled with Towson. Florida , Virginia and BC are right there with Penn State. Stony Brook and Towson not so much.

Florida lost to UNRANKED Jacksonville
Virginia blown out by BC who UNC beat by 12
Penn state another loss ( this one they left with their dignity)

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So much Penn State chatter lately, I guess with a few more local girls headed there, it is to be expected. I don't think they are a bad team, or a "not good" team, as someone has stated. I do think there are definitely over ranked right now. They are over ranked because they beat a MD team that was way over ranked at the time and it catapulted them from unranked at the start of the season into the bottom of the top ten. Which seems like it makes sense except we have now seen MD has not returned to there usual top of the heap, so that win really should not have launched Penn States ranking. If a unranked team beats MD now, they wouldn't see that jump into the top 10 rankings. I still think SBU, FL, VA, BC, probably Towson any maybe even a few others should be ahead of Penn State. They do belong in the 10-20 range, along with 10 other teams and you could pretty much shuffle the deck at that point, and MD should be considered in that mix as well at this point.

Get a grip, Towson was just blown out by Temple, Stony Brook struggled with Towson. Florida , Virginia and BC are right there with Penn State. Stony Brook and Towson not so much.

Florida lost to UNRANKED Jacksonville
Virginia blown out by BC who UNC beat by 12
Penn state another loss ( this one they left with their dignity)

Very surprised to see Jacksonville beat Florida (good for Jacksonville). BC looks to be stronger than most expected. Virginia having an off year. Penn State is solid. Northwestern, Syracuse and UNC are on another level. Looks like Boston College, Notre Dame, Penn State are the next three. Maybe Maryland will improve and put up a fight to be # 2 in the Big 10. Florida is the biggest surprise. Virginia is usually much more competitive. Loyola is also surprising really thought they would be more competitive . Does anyone think Va Tech is Top 20?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So much Penn State chatter lately, I guess with a few more local girls headed there, it is to be expected. I don't think they are a bad team, or a "not good" team, as someone has stated. I do think there are definitely over ranked right now. They are over ranked because they beat a MD team that was way over ranked at the time and it catapulted them from unranked at the start of the season into the bottom of the top ten. Which seems like it makes sense except we have now seen MD has not returned to there usual top of the heap, so that win really should not have launched Penn States ranking. If a unranked team beats MD now, they wouldn't see that jump into the top 10 rankings. I still think SBU, FL, VA, BC, probably Towson any maybe even a few others should be ahead of Penn State. They do belong in the 10-20 range, along with 10 other teams and you could pretty much shuffle the deck at that point, and MD should be considered in that mix as well at this point.

Get a grip, Towson was just blown out by Temple, Stony Brook struggled with Towson. Florida , Virginia and BC are right there with Penn State. Stony Brook and Towson not so much.

Florida lost to UNRANKED Jacksonville
Virginia blown out by BC who UNC beat by 12
Penn state another loss ( this one they left with their dignity)

Very surprised to see Jacksonville beat Florida (good for Jacksonville). BC looks to be stronger than most expected. Virginia having an off year. Penn State is solid. Northwestern, Syracuse and UNC are on another level. Looks like Boston College, Notre Dame, Penn State are the next three. Maybe Maryland will improve and put up a fight to be # 2 in the Big 10. Florida is the biggest surprise. Virginia is usually much more competitive. Loyola is also surprising really thought they would be more competitive . Does anyone think Va Tech is Top 20?

UVA having an off year ? They lost 1 game and have beat a team that they lost to last year and have not beaten BC in 5 years . Would say they are a top 15 team easy and having a typical year It’s UNC and Cuse , NW not on their level . BC top ten but easily behind UNC , Cuse , NW , PSU , SBU , ND . BC in w Towson , MD , Drexel , Florida

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So much Penn State chatter lately, I guess with a few more local girls headed there, it is to be expected. I don't think they are a bad team, or a "not good" team, as someone has stated. I do think there are definitely over ranked right now. They are over ranked because they beat a MD team that was way over ranked at the time and it catapulted them from unranked at the start of the season into the bottom of the top ten. Which seems like it makes sense except we have now seen MD has not returned to there usual top of the heap, so that win really should not have launched Penn States ranking. If a unranked team beats MD now, they wouldn't see that jump into the top 10 rankings. I still think SBU, FL, VA, BC, probably Towson any maybe even a few others should be ahead of Penn State. They do belong in the 10-20 range, along with 10 other teams and you could pretty much shuffle the deck at that point, and MD should be considered in that mix as well at this point.

Get a grip, Towson was just blown out by Temple, Stony Brook struggled with Towson. Florida , Virginia and BC are right there with Penn State. Stony Brook and Towson not so much.

Florida lost to UNRANKED Jacksonville
Virginia blown out by BC who UNC beat by 12
Penn state another loss ( this one they left with their dignity)

Very surprised to see Jacksonville beat Florida (good for Jacksonville). BC looks to be stronger than most expected. Virginia having an off year. Penn State is solid. Northwestern, Syracuse and UNC are on another level. Looks like Boston College, Notre Dame, Penn State are the next three. Maybe Maryland will improve and put up a fight to be # 2 in the Big 10. Florida is the biggest surprise. Virginia is usually much more competitive. Loyola is also surprising really thought they would be more competitive . Does anyone think Va Tech is Top 20?

Notre Dame Vs Syracuse Today at 12:00.... Can Notre Dame improve?

Loyola Vs Drexel could be interesting.

Stanford Vs USC .... Any predictions?

Is Jacksonville for real? They are 3 - 0 and winning close games. Could they be a sleeper and surprise someone if they make the tournament? I hope so.

Florida didn't see this loss coming, Very rare for true top 10 teams to lose to unranked opponents.

Looks Like it will be ACC and Big 10 Teams fighting it out to make it to the Final Four.

UNC, Syracuse, Northwestern then you have Boston College, Penn State, Maryland ...

Based on YTD results it doesn't look like there is anyone else.

Navy? They have surprised before, who knows?

Is it possible that some of the ACC and Big 10 teams could play each other 4 times? Regular season, conference playoffs and NCAA Tournament? Should be interesting.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So much Penn State chatter lately, I guess with a few more local girls headed there, it is to be expected. I don't think they are a bad team, or a "not good" team, as someone has stated. I do think there are definitely over ranked right now. They are over ranked because they beat a MD team that was way over ranked at the time and it catapulted them from unranked at the start of the season into the bottom of the top ten. Which seems like it makes sense except we have now seen MD has not returned to there usual top of the heap, so that win really should not have launched Penn States ranking. If a unranked team beats MD now, they wouldn't see that jump into the top 10 rankings. I still think SBU, FL, VA, BC, probably Towson any maybe even a few others should be ahead of Penn State. They do belong in the 10-20 range, along with 10 other teams and you could pretty much shuffle the deck at that point, and MD should be considered in that mix as well at this point.

Get a grip, Towson was just blown out by Temple, Stony Brook struggled with Towson. Florida , Virginia and BC are right there with Penn State. Stony Brook and Towson not so much.

Florida lost to UNRANKED Jacksonville
Virginia blown out by BC who UNC beat by 12
Penn state another loss ( this one they left with their dignity)

Very surprised to see Jacksonville beat Florida (good for Jacksonville). BC looks to be stronger than most expected. Virginia having an off year. Penn State is solid. Northwestern, Syracuse and UNC are on another level. Looks like Boston College, Notre Dame, Penn State are the next three. Maybe Maryland will improve and put up a fight to be # 2 in the Big 10. Florida is the biggest surprise. Virginia is usually much more competitive. Loyola is also surprising really thought they would be more competitive . Does anyone think Va Tech is Top 20?

UVA having an off year ? They lost 1 game and have beat a team that they lost to last year and have not beaten BC in 5 years . Would say they are a top 15 team easy and having a typical year It’s UNC and Cuse , NW not on their level . BC top ten but easily behind UNC , Cuse , NW , PSU , SBU , ND . BC in w Towson , MD , Drexel , Florida

Stony Brook? Please tell us what they have done? Towson? Did you not see Towson vs Temple? Towson and Stony Brook, really? Florida ? not at this point, sorry Jacksonville loss hurts. We will see how Virginia does the rest of the way, no hiding in the ACC. Would love to see Drexel do well. BC, PSU and maybe ND look like the only teams with any shot at upsetting the Top 3.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So much Penn State chatter lately, I guess with a few more local girls headed there, it is to be expected. I don't think they are a bad team, or a "not good" team, as someone has stated. I do think there are definitely over ranked right now. They are over ranked because they beat a MD team that was way over ranked at the time and it catapulted them from unranked at the start of the season into the bottom of the top ten. Which seems like it makes sense except we have now seen MD has not returned to there usual top of the heap, so that win really should not have launched Penn States ranking. If a unranked team beats MD now, they wouldn't see that jump into the top 10 rankings. I still think SBU, FL, VA, BC, probably Towson any maybe even a few others should be ahead of Penn State. They do belong in the 10-20 range, along with 10 other teams and you could pretty much shuffle the deck at that point, and MD should be considered in that mix as well at this point.

Get a grip, Towson was just blown out by Temple, Stony Brook struggled with Towson. Florida , Virginia and BC are right there with Penn State. Stony Brook and Towson not so much.

Florida lost to UNRANKED Jacksonville
Virginia blown out by BC who UNC beat by 12
Penn state another loss ( this one they left with their dignity)

Very surprised to see Jacksonville beat Florida (good for Jacksonville). BC looks to be stronger than most expected. Virginia having an off year. Penn State is solid. Northwestern, Syracuse and UNC are on another level. Looks like Boston College, Notre Dame, Penn State are the next three. Maybe Maryland will improve and put up a fight to be # 2 in the Big 10. Florida is the biggest surprise. Virginia is usually much more competitive. Loyola is also surprising really thought they would be more competitive . Does anyone think Va Tech is Top 20?

Notre Dame Vs Syracuse Today at 12:00.... Can Notre Dame improve?

Loyola Vs Drexel could be interesting.

Stanford Vs USC .... Any predictions?

Is Jacksonville for real? They are 3 - 0 and winning close games. Could they be a sleeper and surprise someone if they make the tournament? I hope so.

Florida didn't see this loss coming, Very rare for true top 10 teams to lose to unranked opponents.

Looks Like it will be ACC and Big 10 Teams fighting it out to make it to the Final Four.

UNC, Syracuse, Northwestern then you have Boston College, Penn State, Maryland ...

Based on YTD results it doesn't look like there is anyone else.

Navy? They have surprised before, who knows?

Is it possible that some of the ACC and Big 10 teams could play each other 4 times? Regular season, conference playoffs and NCAA Tournament? Should be interesting.

Should have put Notre Dame in the group with Boston College, Penn State and Maryland... Lets see what Notre Dame does today.

US lacrosse please just get rid of the repetitive foul rule in the rule book. NON of your refs get it or call it at the highest levels. I am seeing three to six fouls on the same player as ball is cleared. cross checks, up checks on butt ends.

This is illegal. All to slow the game so team can get into zone and rest.

This is a yellow card. Call it to clean game up.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So much Penn State chatter lately, I guess with a few more local girls headed there, it is to be expected. I don't think they are a bad team, or a "not good" team, as someone has stated. I do think there are definitely over ranked right now. They are over ranked because they beat a MD team that was way over ranked at the time and it catapulted them from unranked at the start of the season into the bottom of the top ten. Which seems like it makes sense except we have now seen MD has not returned to there usual top of the heap, so that win really should not have launched Penn States ranking. If a unranked team beats MD now, they wouldn't see that jump into the top 10 rankings. I still think SBU, FL, VA, BC, probably Towson any maybe even a few others should be ahead of Penn State. They do belong in the 10-20 range, along with 10 other teams and you could pretty much shuffle the deck at that point, and MD should be considered in that mix as well at this point.

Get a grip, Towson was just blown out by Temple, Stony Brook struggled with Towson. Florida , Virginia and BC are right there with Penn State. Stony Brook and Towson not so much.

Florida lost to UNRANKED Jacksonville
Virginia blown out by BC who UNC beat by 12
Penn state another loss ( this one they left with their dignity)

Very surprised to see Jacksonville beat Florida (good for Jacksonville). BC looks to be stronger than most expected. Virginia having an off year. Penn State is solid. Northwestern, Syracuse and UNC are on another level. Looks like Boston College, Notre Dame, Penn State are the next three. Maybe Maryland will improve and put up a fight to be # 2 in the Big 10. Florida is the biggest surprise. Virginia is usually much more competitive. Loyola is also surprising really thought they would be more competitive . Does anyone think Va Tech is Top 20?

UVA having an off year ? They lost 1 game and have beat a team that they lost to last year and have not beaten BC in 5 years . Would say they are a top 15 team easy and having a typical year It’s UNC and Cuse , NW not on their level . BC top ten but easily behind UNC , Cuse , NW , PSU , SBU , ND . BC in w Towson , MD , Drexel , Florida

Stony Brook? Please tell us what they have done? Towson? Did you not see Towson vs Temple? Towson and Stony Brook, really? Florida ? not at this point, sorry Jacksonville loss hurts. We will see how Virginia does the rest of the way, no hiding in the ACC. Would love to see Drexel do well. BC, PSU and maybe ND look like the only teams with any shot at upsetting the Top 3.

UVA will struggle the rest of the season looking at their schedule but who would not with the majority of the rest of the season playing ND , Cuse , UNC , UNC . That said my point was they are not having a down year just a typical year for them , usually in that 10-20 type team for a long time now . The only teams that I would be surprised if they lose ( other than to each other ) are UNC , ND , Cuse , Nw . All other teams can lose to just about anybody

UVA and where they were ranked in the Final Poll of the season:

2012 - #8
2013 - #9
2014 - #4
2015 - #8
2016 - #16
2017 - #14
2018 - #13
2019 - #7

can't count 2020

Notre Dame and Penn State both played very well this weekend. After the Top 3 at this point it looks like Notre Dame, Boston College and Penn State. Never like to count Maryland out but I don't think that they have the horses this year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

US lacrosse please just get rid of the repetitive foul rule in the rule book. NON of your refs get it or call it at the highest levels. I am seeing three to six fouls on the same player as ball is cleared. cross checks, up checks on butt ends.

This is illegal. All to slow the game so team can get into zone and rest.

This is a yellow card. Call it to clean game up.

An up check on the butt end is not illegal as long as it is not towards the body and they do not hook the butt with their webbing

Originally Posted by Anonymous

UVA and where they were ranked in the Final Poll of the season:

2012 - #8
2013 - #9
2014 - #4
2015 - #8
2016 - #16
2017 - #14
2018 - #13
2019 - #7

can't count 2020

I would say more of a top 10 team than a Top 20....
Definitely one of the Top 10 Programs on a regular basis.
The emergence of Boston College (in conference) has made it more challenging for UVA. Excellent program and a great school. They will never have the great record because the ACC is just too competitive but they will always be a Top 10 Program.

Top 5 teams in order ... UNC, Cuse, NW, BC, ND and then maybe PS. ND will struggle on the draw vs all of these teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Top 5 teams in order ... UNC, Cuse, NW, BC, ND and then maybe PS. ND will struggle on the draw vs all of these teams.

Love BC but can’t put them ahead of Notre Dame and or Penn State at this point .... UNC, Syracuse, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Penn State... Boston College...

As much as I detest saying it’s I would put ND before BC and let’s not forget Florida; other then UNC every team will have a bad game.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Top 5 teams in order ... UNC, Cuse, NW, BC, ND and then maybe PS. ND will struggle on the draw vs all of these teams.

BC will lose to SBU if they play .I have said it before its UNC , Cuse , ND , NW . Watch out for Loyola , don’t let the bad start fool you . PSU , BC just not on those teams levels yet and are essentially a one trick pony . Sorry but “ Char Char “ is the most irritating player in the country and can Murray just pipe down because no one would want that kid on their kids team.
Keeping an eye on the Tewaaraton award I hope it goes to a goalie or defender as the offensive front runners are impossible to root for players . The BC kid is the best talent but is unwatchable in the celebrations and the way she makes any team she plays on no better . The UNC kid who used to be the best has now bought into mommy and daddy telling her she needs to get her numbers up . Watched the kid in the second half run thru 3 defenders on a fast break passing up open team mates to get her goals in a 22-1 blowout . Maybe the NW kid but her head down run to goal style is not great . Is their any unselfish player that plays the game the correct way , makes my teammates better Sam Apuzzo type players left ? I don’t see any so I hope a goalie or defender get the award. Am I missing someone that can win a game for your team while making everyone else around them better from a top level team ?

Stop it with ND

Agree with you on BC kid and NU kid both great scorers but don't make their teammates around them better. I think you are way off wit UNC kid. She does make her teammates around her better and is an unselfish player...in a blowout like that she could easily score 10 and didn't. I also think the Aldave kid is an unselfish player...she will recover from leg injury and be back to herself. Gilbert from NU also an offensive force...maybe someone from Syracuse will shine through as well. That said could be the year of the defender or even another goalie.

Oh I get it., your kid couldn’t get into Notre Dame. Wasn’t sure where the disdain was coming from. Took me a moment or two but figured it out.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Top 5 teams in order ... UNC, Cuse, NW, BC, ND and then maybe PS. ND will struggle on the draw vs all of these teams.

BC will lose to SBU if they play .I have said it before its UNC , Cuse , ND , NW . Watch out for Loyola , don’t let the bad start fool you . PSU , BC just not on those teams levels yet and are essentially a one trick pony . Sorry but “ Char Char “ is the most irritating player in the country and can Murray just pipe down because no one would want that kid on their kids team.
Keeping an eye on the Tewaaraton award I hope it goes to a goalie or defender as the offensive front runners are impossible to root for players . The BC kid is the best talent but is unwatchable in the celebrations and the way she makes any team she plays on no better . The UNC kid who used to be the best has now bought into mommy and daddy telling her she needs to get her numbers up . Watched the kid in the second half run thru 3 defenders on a fast break passing up open team mates to get her goals in a 22-1 blowout . Maybe the NW kid but her head down run to goal style is not great . Is their any unselfish player that plays the game the correct way , makes my teammates better Sam Apuzzo type players left ? I don’t see any so I hope a goalie or defender get the award. Am I missing someone that can win a game for your team while making everyone else around them better from a top level team ?

This could be most accurate thing I’ve seen here

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Top 5 teams in order ... UNC, Cuse, NW, BC, ND and then maybe PS. ND will struggle on the draw vs all of these teams.

BC will lose to SBU if they play .I have said it before its UNC , Cuse , ND , NW . Watch out for Loyola , don’t let the bad start fool you . PSU , BC just not on those teams levels yet and are essentially a one trick pony . Sorry but “ Char Char “ is the most irritating player in the country and can Murray just pipe down because no one would want that kid on their kids team.
Keeping an eye on the Tewaaraton award I hope it goes to a goalie or defender as the offensive front runners are impossible to root for players . The BC kid is the best talent but is unwatchable in the celebrations and the way she makes any team she plays on no better . The UNC kid who used to be the best has now bought into mommy and daddy telling her she needs to get her numbers up . Watched the kid in the second half run thru 3 defenders on a fast break passing up open team mates to get her goals in a 22-1 blowout . Maybe the NW kid but her head down run to goal style is not great . Is their any unselfish player that plays the game the correct way , makes my teammates better Sam Apuzzo type players left ? I don’t see any so I hope a goalie or defender get the award. Am I missing someone that can win a game for your team while making everyone else around them better from a top level team ?

Agree with just about everything you say except comment about Stony Brook beating Boston College (if they play). Stony Brook is not a top tier team.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stop it with ND

Why? Notre Dame is one of the very few teams that has a shot at the Final Four, they are also one of the very few teams that has a shot at beating Syracuse, UNC and Northwestern.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

As much as I detest saying it’s I would put ND before BC and let’s not forget Florida; other then UNC every team will have a bad game.

Sorry, Florida deserves no consideration at this point and with no high caliber teams on the schedule they will have to wait until the NCAA Tournament for a chance to prove themselves.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

As much as I detest saying it’s I would put ND before BC and let’s not forget Florida; other then UNC every team will have a bad game.

Sorry, Florida deserves no consideration at this point and with no high caliber teams on the schedule they will have to wait until the NCAA Tournament for a chance to prove themselves.

Actually, Florida has Temple this week. Temple is a solid team (obviously not a UNC, Syracuse, etc...) but if you do not bring your a game they can surprise. It will be interesting to see how Florida responds to their loss to Jacksonville.

People overlook the fact that BC kid is not just a scorer. Yes she needs to do more on the assist side but she did last game. Big differentiator is that she has dominated the draw since taking it last year. BC wins the draw battle in every game. Clearly the most talented kid in the sport that does the most to make her team better with scoring, draws and now assisting more.

Just looked at the poll’s.... after Top 5 they are a complete joke. They should just wait until the season is over. No credibility at all.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Agree with you on BC kid and NU kid both great scorers but don't make their teammates around them better. I think you are way off wit UNC kid. She does make her teammates around her better and is an unselfish player...in a blowout like that she could easily score 10 and didn't. I also think the Aldave kid is an unselfish player...she will recover from leg injury and be back to herself. Gilbert from NU also an offensive force...maybe someone from Syracuse will shine through as well. That said could be the year of the defender or even another goalie.

I watched the UNC kid last year a bunch and I believed she deserved the Award then but several times this year it seems she is playing me ball. Hopefully I am wrong but watched the Va tech game and there were multiple times she drove to cage when a pass to the open player looked to be the right thing to do. In the end of the first half it looked like UNC had a fast break with 2 kids wide open and she pulls it down to go to cage trying to run thru multiple defenders while the second half she seems to stare down a wide open cutter in order to dodge to the goal again I believe putting UNC up 16-1. Its not that I dont think she could have put up 10 goals or more in that game if she wanted to its more that this season she seems more likely to pass up the correct play and take it herself. Maybe the coaches have told her she needs to do this but with that team it seems unlikely. I have seen it in the past with multiple players I believe its called Tewaaraton fever . I felt bad for the Aldave kid as it was apparent she should not have been playing at all in the Cuse games. As of now give it to the UNC defense as a unit, they have been the best players on the field so far in their games.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just looked at the poll’s.... after Top 5 they are a complete joke. They should just wait until the season is over. No credibility at all.

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Boston College
6 Stony Brook
7 Penn State
8 Duke
9 Virginia
10 Maryland
11 Florida
12 Navy
13 Loyola
14 Jacksonville
15 Louisville
16 Towson
17 Drexel
18 Richmond
19 Stanford
20 Temple

IMHO Stony Brook has done nothing to warrant a #6 ranking. Lets see what happens when Virginia and Duke play winner can stay in the Top 10... Maryland is about right. Sorry Florida you lost to Jacksonville you are too high at 11. Loyola at 13 is absurd. Towson was doing OK but how are they at 16 after getting blown off the field by Temple who shows up at 20?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stop it with ND

Why? Notre Dame is one of the very few teams that has a shot at the Final Four, they are also one of the very few teams that has a shot at beating Syracuse, UNC and Northwestern.

They just played Syracuse twice and lost????

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stop it with ND

Why? Notre Dame is one of the very few teams that has a shot at the Final Four, they are also one of the very few teams that has a shot at beating Syracuse, UNC and Northwestern.

They just played Syracuse twice and lost????

I guess the should just pack it in and stop playing. What’s with the question marks, and what is your point?

Two interesting games this Friday:

Duke at Virginia

Florida at Temple

any predictions?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Two interesting games this Friday:

Duke at Virginia

Florida at Temple

any predictions?

Another one to watch is Albany at Stony Brook on Saturday.

SB by 10

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Two interesting games this Friday:

Duke at Virginia

Florida at Temple

any predictions?

Another one to watch is Albany at Stony Brook on Saturday.

I will go Duke and UVA split the two games ( Duke much better at draw but less athletic overall)
Florida by 4 in low scoring affair
SBU by 8

Originally Posted by Anonymous

SB by 10

Sure Joe.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Agree with you on BC kid and NU kid both great scorers but don't make their teammates around them better. I think you are way off wit UNC kid. She does make her teammates around her better and is an unselfish player...in a blowout like that she could easily score 10 and didn't. I also think the Aldave kid is an unselfish player...she will recover from leg injury and be back to herself. Gilbert from NU also an offensive force...maybe someone from Syracuse will shine through as well. That said could be the year of the defender or even another goalie.

I watched the UNC kid last year a bunch and I believed she deserved the Award then but several times this year it seems she is playing me ball. Hopefully I am wrong but watched the Va tech game and there were multiple times she drove to cage when a pass to the open player looked to be the right thing to do. In the end of the first half it looked like UNC had a fast break with 2 kids wide open and she pulls it down to go to cage trying to run thru multiple defenders while the second half she seems to stare down a wide open cutter in order to dodge to the goal again I believe putting UNC up 16-1. Its not that I dont think she could have put up 10 goals or more in that game if she wanted to its more that this season she seems more likely to pass up the correct play and take it herself. Maybe the coaches have told her she needs to do this but with that team it seems unlikely. I have seen it in the past with multiple players I believe its called Tewaaraton fever . I felt bad for the Aldave kid as it was apparent she should not have been playing at all in the Cuse games. As of now give it to the UNC defense as a unit, they have been the best players on the field so far in their games.

Let it all play out

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Two interesting games this Friday:

Duke at Virginia

Florida at Temple

any predictions?

Another one to watch is Albany at Stony Brook on Saturday.

Zap you think this will be a good one? I think it will as well This season is so unpredictable so far has been a lot of fun

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just looked at the poll’s.... after Top 5 they are a complete joke. They should just wait until the season is over. No credibility at all.

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Boston College
6 Stony Brook
7 Penn State
8 Duke
9 Virginia
10 Maryland
11 Florida
12 Navy
13 Loyola
14 Jacksonville
15 Louisville
16 Towson
17 Drexel
18 Richmond
19 Stanford
20 Temple

IMHO Stony Brook has done nothing to warrant a #6 ranking. Lets see what happens when Virginia and Duke play winner can stay in the Top 10... Maryland is about right. Sorry Florida you lost to Jacksonville you are too high at 11. Loyola at 13 is absurd. Towson was doing OK but how are they at 16 after getting blown off the field by Temple who shows up at 20?

I actually think minus the top three it isn’t necessarily what you’ve done but just don’t do anything Too bad (Florida vs Jax etc. personally think many people on here have selective memory. There are good losses and bad losses

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Agree with you on BC kid and NU kid both great scorers but don't make their teammates around them better. I think you are way off wit UNC kid. She does make her teammates around her better and is an unselfish player...in a blowout like that she could easily score 10 and didn't. I also think the Aldave kid is an unselfish player...she will recover from leg injury and be back to herself. Gilbert from NU also an offensive force...maybe someone from Syracuse will shine through as well. That said could be the year of the defender or even another goalie.

I watched the UNC kid last year a bunch and I believed she deserved the Award then but several times this year it seems she is playing me ball. Hopefully I am wrong but watched the Va tech game and there were multiple times she drove to cage when a pass to the open player looked to be the right thing to do. In the end of the first half it looked like UNC had a fast break with 2 kids wide open and she pulls it down to go to cage trying to run thru multiple defenders while the second half she seems to stare down a wide open cutter in order to dodge to the goal again I believe putting UNC up 16-1. Its not that I dont think she could have put up 10 goals or more in that game if she wanted to its more that this season she seems more likely to pass up the correct play and take it herself. Maybe the coaches have told her she needs to do this but with that team it seems unlikely. I have seen it in the past with multiple players I believe its called Tewaaraton fever . I felt bad for the Aldave kid as it was apparent she should not have been playing at all in the Cuse games. As of now give it to the UNC defense as a unit, they have been the best players on the field so far in their games.

Let it all play out

Why do you come on this site if you do not want to discuss women's lacrosse?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stop it with ND

Why? Notre Dame is one of the very few teams that has a shot at the Final Four, they are also one of the very few teams that has a shot at beating Syracuse, UNC and Northwestern.

They just played Syracuse twice and lost????

I guess the should just pack it in and stop playing. What’s with the question marks, and what is your point?

Uh oh little Domer dad getting upset Come on sally

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stop it with ND

Why? Notre Dame is one of the very few teams that has a shot at the Final Four, they are also one of the very few teams that has a shot at beating Syracuse, UNC and Northwestern.

They just played Syracuse twice and lost????

I guess the should just pack it in and stop playing. What’s with the question marks, and what is your point?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stop it with ND

Why? Notre Dame is one of the very few teams that has a shot at the Final Four, they are also one of the very few teams that has a shot at beating Syracuse, UNC and Northwestern.

They just played Syracuse twice and lost????

I guess the should just pack it in and stop playing. What’s with the question marks, and what is your point?

They have a shot at beating Syracuse but yet just lost to them twice, so you think they have a shot of being Northwestern & UNC...hmmmm

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Agree with you on BC kid and NU kid both great scorers but don't make their teammates around them better. I think you are way off wit UNC kid. She does make her teammates around her better and is an unselfish player...in a blowout like that she could easily score 10 and didn't. I also think the Aldave kid is an unselfish player...she will recover from leg injury and be back to herself. Gilbert from NU also an offensive force...maybe someone from Syracuse will shine through as well. That said could be the year of the defender or even another goalie.

I watched the UNC kid last year a bunch and I believed she deserved the Award then but several times this year it seems she is playing me ball. Hopefully I am wrong but watched the Va tech game and there were multiple times she drove to cage when a pass to the open player looked to be the right thing to do. In the end of the first half it looked like UNC had a fast break with 2 kids wide open and she pulls it down to go to cage trying to run thru multiple defenders while the second half she seems to stare down a wide open cutter in order to dodge to the goal again I believe putting UNC up 16-1. Its not that I dont think she could have put up 10 goals or more in that game if she wanted to its more that this season she seems more likely to pass up the correct play and take it herself. Maybe the coaches have told her she needs to do this but with that team it seems unlikely. I have seen it in the past with multiple players I believe its called Tewaaraton fever . I felt bad for the Aldave kid as it was apparent she should not have been playing at all in the Cuse games. As of now give it to the UNC defense as a unit, they have been the best players on the field so far in their games.

Let it all play out

Yes let’s let it all just play out and stop all discussions about anything pertaining to women’s lacrosse on a women’s lacrosse forum .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Notre Dame and Penn State both played very well this weekend. After the Top 3 at this point it looks like Notre Dame, Boston College and Penn State. Never like to count Maryland out but I don't think that they have the horses this year.

0-4 is 0-4 you can’t have it both ways They aren’t in top tier esp PSU

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Agree with you on BC kid and NU kid both great scorers but don't make their teammates around them better. I think you are way off wit UNC kid. She does make her teammates around her better and is an unselfish player...in a blowout like that she could easily score 10 and didn't. I also think the Aldave kid is an unselfish player...she will recover from leg injury and be back to herself. Gilbert from NU also an offensive force...maybe someone from Syracuse will shine through as well. That said could be the year of the defender or even another goalie.

I watched the UNC kid last year a bunch and I believed she deserved the Award then but several times this year it seems she is playing me ball. Hopefully I am wrong but watched the Va tech game and there were multiple times she drove to cage when a pass to the open player looked to be the right thing to do. In the end of the first half it looked like UNC had a fast break with 2 kids wide open and she pulls it down to go to cage trying to run thru multiple defenders while the second half she seems to stare down a wide open cutter in order to dodge to the goal again I believe putting UNC up 16-1. Its not that I dont think she could have put up 10 goals or more in that game if she wanted to its more that this season she seems more likely to pass up the correct play and take it herself. Maybe the coaches have told her she needs to do this but with that team it seems unlikely. I have seen it in the past with multiple players I believe its called Tewaaraton fever . I felt bad for the Aldave kid as it was apparent she should not have been playing at all in the Cuse games. As of now give it to the UNC defense as a unit, they have been the best players on the field so far in their games.

Let it all play out

Why do you come on this site if you do not want to discuss women's lacrosse?

Talking about it is different than people whether it’s unc penn st SB etc. crapping on every team while pumping your own. This would be a great spot if people weren’t only about bashing and actually discussed the sport our daughters play. It’s very funny to watch the stupidity

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stop it with ND

Why? Notre Dame is one of the very few teams that has a shot at the Final Four, they are also one of the very few teams that has a shot at beating Syracuse, UNC and Northwestern.

They just played Syracuse twice and lost????

I guess the should just pack it in and stop playing. What’s with the question marks, and what is your point?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stop it with ND

Why? Notre Dame is one of the very few teams that has a shot at the Final Four, they are also one of the very few teams that has a shot at beating Syracuse, UNC and Northwestern.

They just played Syracuse twice and lost????

I guess the should just pack it in and stop playing. What’s with the question marks, and what is your point?

They have a shot at beating Syracuse but yet just lost to them twice, so you think they have a shot of being Northwestern & UNC...hmmmm

UNC no, Syracuse and Northwestern yes. I am guessing you never played a competitive sport in your entire life.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Notre Dame and Penn State both played very well this weekend. After the Top 3 at this point it looks like Notre Dame, Boston College and Penn State. Never like to count Maryland out but I don't think that they have the horses this year.

0-4 is 0-4 you can’t have it both ways They aren’t in top tier esp PSU

The Top Tier is “North Carolina, Syracuse Northwestern” Notre Dame and Penn State are in the next tier ahead of just about everyone else with the exception of BC who is in the tier with ND and PSU.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Agree with you on BC kid and NU kid both great scorers but don't make their teammates around them better. I think you are way off wit UNC kid. She does make her teammates around her better and is an unselfish player...in a blowout like that she could easily score 10 and didn't. I also think the Aldave kid is an unselfish player...she will recover from leg injury and be back to herself. Gilbert from NU also an offensive force...maybe someone from Syracuse will shine through as well. That said could be the year of the defender or even another goalie.

I watched the UNC kid last year a bunch and I believed she deserved the Award then but several times this year it seems she is playing me ball. Hopefully I am wrong but watched the Va tech game and there were multiple times she drove to cage when a pass to the open player looked to be the right thing to do. In the end of the first half it looked like UNC had a fast break with 2 kids wide open and she pulls it down to go to cage trying to run thru multiple defenders while the second half she seems to stare down a wide open cutter in order to dodge to the goal again I believe putting UNC up 16-1. Its not that I dont think she could have put up 10 goals or more in that game if she wanted to its more that this season she seems more likely to pass up the correct play and take it herself. Maybe the coaches have told her she needs to do this but with that team it seems unlikely. I have seen it in the past with multiple players I believe its called Tewaaraton fever . I felt bad for the Aldave kid as it was apparent she should not have been playing at all in the Cuse games. As of now give it to the UNC defense as a unit, they have been the best players on the field so far in their games.

Let it all play out

Why do you come on this site if you do not want to discuss women's lacrosse?

Talking about it is different than people whether it’s unc penn st SB etc. crapping on every team while pumping your own. This would be a great spot if people weren’t only about bashing and actually discussed the sport our daughters play. It’s very funny to watch the stupidity

And yet neither of your posts discuss anything related to women’s lacrosse . Not sure what team the post you responded to was bashing , maybe reading comprehension is the issue .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just looked at the poll’s.... after Top 5 they are a complete joke. They should just wait until the season is over. No credibility at all.

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Boston College
6 Stony Brook
7 Penn State
8 Duke
9 Virginia
10 Maryland
11 Florida
12 Navy
13 Loyola
14 Jacksonville
15 Louisville
16 Towson
17 Drexel
18 Richmond
19 Stanford
20 Temple

IMHO Stony Brook has done nothing to warrant a #6 ranking. Lets see what happens when Virginia and Duke play winner can stay in the Top 10... Maryland is about right. Sorry Florida you lost to Jacksonville you are too high at 11. Loyola at 13 is absurd. Towson was doing OK but how are they at 16 after getting blown off the field by Temple who shows up at 20?

I actually think minus the top three it isn’t necessarily what you’ve done but just don’t do anything Too bad (Florida vs Jax etc. personally think many people on here have selective memory. There are good losses and bad losses

Oh stop. At some point you have to beat a decent team and be competitive against the best teams. Any loss by more than 5 goals is a bad loss and losing by 10 or more is a really bad loss.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stop it with ND

Why? Notre Dame is one of the very few teams that has a shot at the Final Four, they are also one of the very few teams that has a shot at beating Syracuse, UNC and Northwestern.

They just played Syracuse twice and lost????

I guess the should just pack it in and stop playing. What’s with the question marks, and what is your point?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Stop it with ND

Why? Notre Dame is one of the very few teams that has a shot at the Final Four, they are also one of the very few teams that has a shot at beating Syracuse, UNC and Northwestern.

They just played Syracuse twice and lost????

I guess the should just pack it in and stop playing. What’s with the question marks, and what is your point?

They have a shot at beating Syracuse but yet just lost to them twice, so you think they have a shot of being Northwestern & UNC...hmmmm

UNC no, Syracuse and Northwestern yes. I am guessing you never played a competitive sport in your entire life.

Why do you get soooo worked up over ND?

Based on program history I did not consider Notre Dame to be a team that could possibly make the Final Four. However, after watching both games vs Syracuse my opinion has changed. Notre Dame is a very good team, their ACC schedule is challenging but if they can win some games vs UVA , BC, Duke etc... they will be prepared for the Tournament and could possibly make it to the Final Four.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Based on program history I did not consider Notre Dame to be a team that could possibly make the Final Four. However, after watching both games vs Syracuse my opinion has changed. Notre Dame is a very good team, their ACC schedule is challenging but if they can win some games vs UVA , BC, Duke etc... they will be prepared for the Tournament and could possibly make it to the Final Four.

There is no excuse for ND not to be top 4 Top recruits yet year After year same stuff

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Based on program history I did not consider Notre Dame to be a team that could possibly make the Final Four. However, after watching both games vs Syracuse my opinion has changed. Notre Dame is a very good team, their ACC schedule is challenging but if they can win some games vs UVA , BC, Duke etc... they will be prepared for the Tournament and could possibly make it to the Final Four.

There is no excuse for ND not to be top 4 Top recruits yet year After year same stuff

ND seems to get knocked all the time for not winning a National Championship or making it to the Final Four. Some of the bashing is justified some of it is not. No team can be expected to make it to championship weekend every year but you would think that a program/university like ND would challenge at least once in a while. Maybe this will be their year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Based on program history I did not consider Notre Dame to be a team that could possibly make the Final Four. However, after watching both games vs Syracuse my opinion has changed. Notre Dame is a very good team, their ACC schedule is challenging but if they can win some games vs UVA , BC, Duke etc... they will be prepared for the Tournament and could possibly make it to the Final Four.

There is no excuse for ND not to be top 4 Top recruits yet year After year same stuff

Oh, I don’t know maybe because they actually have to compete and not just be crowned top 4. There are a bunch of other programs that fight to make it to championship weekend. They don’t always make it but why would you think Notre Dame should be there over programs like Northwestern, North Carolina, Boston College, Maryland, Virginia, Penn State, Duke,Princeton, Penn Florida, Syracuse etc... Notre Dame is a great school with an excellent program but there are many other great schools with excellent programs (they all can’t be top 4). BTW, this just might be their year .

ND and Florida are 2 teams that people say underperform relative to talent due to coaching. Not sure if people agree with that statement.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

ND and Florida are 2 teams that people say underperform relative to talent due to coaching. Not sure if people agree with that statement.

Florida's best bet for a national title was with their inaugural incoming class, when they were Juniors and Seniors, that opportunity slipped by. They looked like they had another shot to contend when Gilroy was there as well. Since those days, they have been slowly slipping further and further away from contending for real. ND has never been a real contender in that timeframe, but they seem to finally be on the rise. The next few years will be their best shot, see how it plays out.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

ND and Florida are 2 teams that people say underperform relative to talent due to coaching. Not sure if people agree with that statement.

Agree, but who is saying they have underperformed? Is it the parents of players who attend / attended ND & Florida?
I don’t know that you can say they have underachieved
Relative to other Top Teams. Maryland, UNC, Virginia, Duke, Northwestern have all brought in more talent than ND and Florida. Syracuse has brought in about the same as Florida and ND. They are both excellent programs. Maybe some people have unrealistic expectations.

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

It’s not not really about seniors, 5th year or graduate transfers, it’s about bringing in the best recruits. For the most part the programs that bring in the most high end recruits usually have the best teams. Syracuse, UNC, Northwestern consistently bring in top tier recruits. If a program does not bring in strong players they will have a hard time beating the programs that do bring in strong players. If a program can stockpile those high end recruits, keep them for a 5th year and bring in high end transfers they will be tough to beat.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

It’s not not really about seniors, 5th year or graduate transfers, it’s about bringing in the best recruits. For the most part the programs that bring in the most high end recruits usually have the best teams. Syracuse, UNC, Northwestern consistently bring in top tier recruits. If a program does not bring in strong players they will have a hard time beating the programs that do bring in strong players. If a program can stockpile those high end recruits, keep them for a 5th year and bring in high end transfers they will be tough to beat.

Obviously bringing in the best recruits is important. But your reply reinforced what was stated. Keep top recruits till they are seniors, 5th year players and Grad transfers and your team will compete for natty. Since the scholarship cap was changed for this year does this years National Champ get an asterisk??

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

It’s not not really about seniors, 5th year or graduate transfers, it’s about bringing in the best recruits. For the most part the programs that bring in the most high end recruits usually have the best teams. Syracuse, UNC, Northwestern consistently bring in top tier recruits. If a program does not bring in strong players they will have a hard time beating the programs that do bring in strong players. If a program can stockpile those high end recruits, keep them for a 5th year and bring in high end transfers they will be tough to beat.

Obviously bringing in the best recruits is important. But your reply reinforced what was stated. Keep top recruits till they are seniors, 5th year players and Grad transfers and your team will compete for natty. Since the scholarship cap was changed for this year does this years National Champ get an asterisk??

The top programs bring in the best players . If average programs had a bunch of 5th year players they would still have an average team. The teams you are talking about are two of the best programs with or without the 5th year players. All schools can bring in transfers and retain their 5th year players that doesn’t mean they will be competitive.

With the Ivy League out of competition, will the NCAA eliminate one of the play-in games or just add an at-large bid?

Would be nice to see the money allocated to wlax for Syracuse, UNC as compared to other wlax teams as it appears they have gone over the scholarship cap. ******Asterisk for this years National Champs.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Did you even bother to look at ND roster or Loyola , stop with the whining .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Did you even bother to look at ND roster or Loyola , stop with the whining .

Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Would be nice to see the money allocated to wlax for Syracuse, UNC as compared to other wlax teams as it appears they have gone over the scholarship cap. ******Asterisk for this years National Champs.

The NCAA allowed programs to exceed the cap for returning 5th year seniors this year. If any number of players (who were on scholarship) decided to return for a 5th year the institution could honor their scholarships without it impacting the cap of 12. It is up to the institution to decide if they want to fund the scholarships or not fund the scholarships.

Stop whining, there is no asterisk. For the most part there are only a handful of programs that have a legitimate shot at winning a National Championship each year. It was great to see JMU put together such a great run but they were obviously the exception not the rule. That said, JMU has been a competitive program for many years, most years they are top 20. There just is not enough talent to go around, the top 8 -12 programs scoop up just about all of the top recruits and they consistently dominate the rest of the programs. Navy found a way to make it to the Final Four and JMU won a National championship but who else has done anything to suggest that they can complete with the top programs. If a program can’t bring in top tier recruits how are they going to compete with the programs that do? It’s not about 5th year players, it’s about the caliber of the player.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Did you even bother to look at ND roster or Loyola , stop with the whining .

Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.

Your response just shows your ignorance . First UNC has one transfer player . Second every year some teams are fully funded while others are not . You sound like a whinny flaccid lost who hates most likely a UNC player . Stop being a flaccid chubby non athlete and have a conversation with the dad you so envy or shut up . The only asterisk should be on your birth certificate where it says most likely male .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

With the Ivy League out of competition, will the NCAA eliminate one of the play-in games or just add an at-large bid?

I would think they would add an at large bid and just keep the same number of teams in the tournament.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Would be nice to see the money allocated to wlax for Syracuse, UNC as compared to other wlax teams as it appears they have gone over the scholarship cap. ******Asterisk for this years National Champs.

The NCAA allowed programs to exceed the cap for returning 5th year seniors this year. If any number of players (who were on scholarship) decided to return for a 5th year the institution could honor their scholarships without it impacting the cap of 12. It is up to the institution to decide if they want to fund the scholarships or not fund the scholarships.

Stop whining, there is no asterisk. For the most part there are only a handful of programs that have a legitimate shot at winning a National Championship each year. It was great to see JMU put together such a great run but they were obviously the exception not the rule. That said, JMU has been a competitive program for many years, most years they are top 20. There just is not enough talent to go around, the top 8 -12 programs scoop up just about all of the top recruits and they consistently dominate the rest of the programs. Navy found a way to make it to the Final Four and JMU won a National championship but who else has done anything to suggest that they can complete with the top programs. If a program can’t bring in top tier recruits how are they going to compete with the programs that do? It’s not about 5th year players, it’s about the caliber of the player.

Gee. Thanks for the wlax history lesson. And thanks for once again restating that schools were allowed this year to exceed cap. Your understanding of current wlax is extraordinary. So does a program that is funding scholarships over the 12.5 have an advantage. Maybe answer the question in between reading the newspaper comics.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Did you even bother to look at ND roster or Loyola , stop with the whining .

Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.

Your response just shows your ignorance . First UNC has one transfer player . Second every year some teams are fully funded while others are not . You sound like a whinny flaccid lost who hates most likely a UNC player . Stop being a flaccid chubby non athlete and have a conversation with the dad you so envy or shut up . The only asterisk should be on your birth certificate where it says most likely male .

Obvious your not a Mensa member. But educate us with your wlax knowledge. Does a team that is funding its program over the 12.5 scholarship cap by bringing back 5th year players, Grad transfers etc have an advantage. Oh yea see if your vocabulary goes deeper. And after your deep thinking response you can go home and get your shine box.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Did you even bother to look at ND roster or Loyola , stop with the whining .

Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.

Your response just shows your ignorance . First UNC has one transfer player . Second every year some teams are fully funded while others are not . You sound like a whinny flaccid lost who hates most likely a UNC player . Stop being a flaccid chubby non athlete and have a conversation with the dad you so envy or shut up . The only asterisk should be on your birth certificate where it says most likely male .

Obvious your not a Mensa member. But educate us with your wlax knowledge. Does a team that is funding its program over the 12.5 scholarship cap by bringing back 5th year players, Grad transfers etc have an advantage. Oh yea see if your vocabulary goes deeper. And after your deep thinking response you can go home and get your shine box.

I am not the person that you are responding to but I will chime in. Why do you have a problem with 5th year players, grad transfers etc... and / or schools that are funding their program beyond the 12 scholarship limit for this year? The NCAA granted all 2020 spring sport athletes an additional year of eligibility nobody is doing anything wrong, everybody is playing by the same rules. Programs that are able to bring in the best players always have an advantage, do you think talent should somehow be divided up evenly among all programs? Do you think every program should have to offer the same amount of scholarships? Should all programs have the same operating budget? There are other schools that have 5th year players and graduate transfers , why do you only seem to be bothered by UNC and Syracuse?
Again I ask, why do you have a problem with any of this?

“Obvious your not a Mensa member. But educate us with your wlax knowledge. Does a team that is funding its program over the 12.5 scholarship cap by bringing back 5th year players, Grad transfers etc have an advantage. Oh yea see if your vocabulary goes deeper. And after your deep thinking response you can go home and get your shine box.”

You are obviously something, again every year there are programs that take advantage of the NCAA rules and fully find their programs while there are programs that don’t . Obviously the fully funded programs have an advantage but the rules are the same for all . Should there be an asterisk every year ? The shine box response is used by every fake wanna be mobster who has zero original thoughts . It’s obvious you dislike someone with a kid playing at UNC or Syracuse , you should talk to them directly but again the flaccid fake tough guys never do . Will be awesome to watch UNC or Cuse win it this year as both programs have the best players from LI .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Would be nice to see the money allocated to wlax for Syracuse, UNC as compared to other wlax teams as it appears they have gone over the scholarship cap. ******Asterisk for this years National Champs.

The NCAA allowed programs to exceed the cap for returning 5th year seniors this year. If any number of players (who were on scholarship) decided to return for a 5th year the institution could honor their scholarships without it impacting the cap of 12. It is up to the institution to decide if they want to fund the scholarships or not fund the scholarships.

Stop whining, there is no asterisk. For the most part there are only a handful of programs that have a legitimate shot at winning a National Championship each year. It was great to see JMU put together such a great run but they were obviously the exception not the rule. That said, JMU has been a competitive program for many years, most years they are top 20. There just is not enough talent to go around, the top 8 -12 programs scoop up just about all of the top recruits and they consistently dominate the rest of the programs. Navy found a way to make it to the Final Four and JMU won a National championship but who else has done anything to suggest that they can complete with the top programs. If a program can’t bring in top tier recruits how are they going to compete with the programs that do? It’s not about 5th year players, it’s about the caliber of the player.

Gee. Thanks for the wlax history lesson. And thanks for once again restating that schools were allowed this year to exceed cap. Your understanding of current wlax is extraordinary. So does a program that is funding scholarships over the 12.5 have an advantage. Maybe answer the question in between reading the newspaper comics.

Teams that have better players have an advantage. Not sure why you are so bitter. Are you the same person carrying on about how this years National Champion should have an asterisk? Please explain why having 5th year players, graduate transfers etc... and being able to fund additional scholarships is such a problem. The rules are the same for every program.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Would be nice to see the money allocated to wlax for Syracuse, UNC as compared to other wlax teams as it appears they have gone over the scholarship cap. ******Asterisk for this years National Champs.

The NCAA allowed programs to exceed the cap for returning 5th year seniors this year. If any number of players (who were on scholarship) decided to return for a 5th year the institution could honor their scholarships without it impacting the cap of 12. It is up to the institution to decide if they want to fund the scholarships or not fund the scholarships.

Stop whining, there is no asterisk. For the most part there are only a handful of programs that have a legitimate shot at winning a National Championship each year. It was great to see JMU put together such a great run but they were obviously the exception not the rule. That said, JMU has been a competitive program for many years, most years they are top 20. There just is not enough talent to go around, the top 8 -12 programs scoop up just about all of the top recruits and they consistently dominate the rest of the programs. Navy found a way to make it to the Final Four and JMU won a National championship but who else has done anything to suggest that they can complete with the top programs. If a program can’t bring in top tier recruits how are they going to compete with the programs that do? It’s not about 5th year players, it’s about the caliber of the player.

Gee. Thanks for the wlax history lesson. And thanks for once again restating that schools were allowed this year to exceed cap. Your understanding of current wlax is extraordinary. So does a program that is funding scholarships over the 12.5 have an advantage. Maybe answer the question in between reading the newspaper comics.

Such a sour post. Why does this situation bother you so much? There is never a level playing field in college athletics. Some programs fully fund their program some do not. Some schools have better academics than others. Some schools have more pull with their admissions. Some have better facilities. Some schools are considered more desirable than others. Some programs have better coaches than others. Some programs have more history and tradition than others. The list goes on and on certain programs have many advantages over other programs.

As to your question “does a program that is funding scholarships over the 12 have an advantage?” I will ask, have an advantage over who? Any school that is not funding their program to the maximum that the NCAA allows is at a disadvantage but that is their own doing.

Sorry, I really don’t see your point. Is there a particular program that you believe is being hurt by this situation? Is there a program that you believe would be challenging for a National Championship if the NCAA did not allow for schools to fund additional scholarships?

The 5th year were able to be funded by 3rd party donations. From a individual for this year only. Back to 12.6 next year. Not an easy budget to balance for coaches who were given a one year Stimulus plan.

5th years this year and next 4 years will provide a back up and transferring of talent, and budget nightmare. I would suspect transfer portal to light up at end of season with HIGH level talent in all grad years.

Talk about bitter people. The question raised is .... do the schools that have brought back 5th year players and grad players/transfers and are over the 12.5 scholarship cap have an advantage??? Pretty simple. Blah blah about fully funded programs. Again don’t need a wlax history lesson. With all the knowledgeable experts out there can we get an answer

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Talk about bitter people. The question raised is .... do the schools that have brought back 5th year players and grad players/transfers and are over the 12.5 scholarship cap have an advantage??? Pretty simple. Blah blah about fully funded programs. Again don’t need a wlax history lesson. With all the knowledgeable experts out there can we get an answer

An advantage over who?
What is the purpose of your question?
Are you trying to somehow diminish the success a team has if in fact the team fits your cry?
Are you trying to make a point?
Why are you obsessed with the question?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Talk about bitter people. The question raised is .... do the schools that have brought back 5th year players and grad players/transfers and are over the 12.5 scholarship cap have an advantage??? Pretty simple. Blah blah about fully funded programs. Again don’t need a wlax history lesson. With all the knowledgeable experts out there can we get an answer

An advantage over who?
What is the purpose of your question?
Are you trying to somehow diminish the success a team has if in fact the team fits your criteria?
Are you trying to make a point?
Why are you obsessed with the question?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Talk about bitter people. The question raised is .... do the schools that have brought back 5th year players and grad players/transfers and are over the 12.5 scholarship cap have an advantage??? Pretty simple. Blah blah about fully funded programs. Again don’t need a wlax history lesson. With all the knowledgeable experts out there can we get an answer

An advantage over who?
What is the purpose of your question?
Are you trying to somehow diminish the success a team has if in fact the team fits your cry?
Are you trying to make a point?
Why are you obsessed with the question?

Answer a question with 6 questions. So much for knowledgeable experts. Ok. Will spell it out for you. Team-A brings back numerous 5th year/ grad players and uses 20 scholarship dollars. Team-B stays at the 12.5 cap. Which team has advantage. Not too hard a question. Not a trick question. Sooooo.....answer the question Kreskin.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Talk about bitter people. The question raised is .... do the schools that have brought back 5th year players and grad players/transfers and are over the 12.5 scholarship cap have an advantage??? Pretty simple. Blah blah about fully funded programs. Again don’t need a wlax history lesson. With all the knowledgeable experts out there can we get an answer

Every year the teams that fund the maximum amount of scholarships that the NCAA permits have an advantage over programs that do not .As far as 5th year players and grad transfers it’s again the same as every other year it depends on the player . You keep getting roasted by the poster that seems like an attorney with no other poster even remotely agreeing w you . Your animonsity of either a player or their parents that go to UNC or Cuse will make you even more miserable when they play for the national championship .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Talk about bitter people. The question raised is .... do the schools that have brought back 5th year players and grad players/transfers and are over the 12.5 scholarship cap have an advantage??? Pretty simple. Blah blah about fully funded programs. Again don’t need a wlax history lesson. With all the knowledgeable experts out there can we get an answer

Every year the teams that fund the maximum amount of scholarships that the NCAA permits have an advantage over programs that do not .As far as 5th year players and grad transfers it’s again the same as every other year it depends on the player . You keep getting roasted by the poster that seems like an attorney with no other poster even remotely agreeing w you . Your animonsity of either a player or their parents that go to UNC or Cuse will make you even more miserable when they play for the national championship .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Talk about bitter people. The question raised is .... do the schools that have brought back 5th year players and grad players/transfers and are over the 12.5 scholarship cap have an advantage??? Pretty simple. Blah blah about fully funded programs. Again don’t need a wlax history lesson. With all the knowledgeable experts out there can we get an answer

An advantage over who?
What is the purpose of your question?
Are you trying to somehow diminish the success a team has if in fact the team fits your cry?
Are you trying to make a point?
Why are you obsessed with the question?

Answer a question with 6 questions. So much for knowledgeable experts. Ok. Will spell it out for you. Team-A brings back numerous 5th year/ grad players and uses 20 scholarship dollars. Team-B stays at the 12.5 cap. Which team has advantage. Not too hard a question. Not a trick question. Sooooo.....answer the question Kreskin.

New to this discussion . But your question is like saying UNC or Hartford , who has the advantage ? They are all on the same playing field as they are every year. The Best teams bring in the best players. Any of the teams that have a chance of competing for a title all have the ability to bring in and or keep 5th years or transfers and fund them. Some teams just have done a better job. Don't relly see any advantage.

Watched second half unc I know we talk about stat padding how about unc leaving starters in and Ortega scoring final goal of game with under a minute left or we don’t do that for every team. Was terrible in a blowout

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Talk about bitter people. The question raised is .... do the schools that have brought back 5th year players and grad players/transfers and are over the 12.5 scholarship cap have an advantage??? Pretty simple. Blah blah about fully funded programs. Again don’t need a wlax history lesson. With all the knowledgeable experts out there can we get an answer

Every year the teams that fund the maximum amount of scholarships that the NCAA permits have an advantage over programs that do not .As far as 5th year players and grad transfers it’s again the same as every other year it depends on the player . You keep getting roasted by the poster that seems like an attorney with no other poster even remotely agreeing w you . Your animonsity of either a player or their parents that go to UNC or Cuse will make you even more miserable when they play for the national championship .

It’s the same as every other year. Really??? This year programs can go over the 12.5 scholarship cap. Some appear to have gone way over. So is that an even playing field??? I guess our knowledgeable experts don’t want to answer question.
So you can go back to the usual
1-only four teams can win the natty
2-SBU stinks
3-Spalina is the best coach.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Talk about bitter people. The question raised is .... do the schools that have brought back 5th year players and grad players/transfers and are over the 12.5 scholarship cap have an advantage??? Pretty simple. Blah blah about fully funded programs. Again don’t need a wlax history lesson. With all the knowledgeable experts out there can we get an answer

An advantage over who?
What is the purpose of your question?
Are you trying to somehow diminish the success a team has if in fact the team fits your cry?
Are you trying to make a point?
Why are you obsessed with the question?

Answer a question with 6 questions. So much for knowledgeable experts. Ok. Will spell it out for you. Team-A brings back numerous 5th year/ grad players and uses 20 scholarship dollars. Team-B stays at the 12.5 cap. Which team has advantage. Not too hard a question. Not a trick question. Sooooo.....answer the question Kreskin.

I notice that you didn’t answer any of the questions. BTW this is college lacrosse, many teams have many advantages over many other teams. There are programs that offer no scholarships, there are programs that are funded to different levels, there are programs with indoor facilities, there are programs that have more flexible admissions standards, yet we do not see people whinnying about it. Your weird fixation on this topic is a bit strange.
Since The Ivy’s are not playing I will use them as a benchmark.
From what I understand The Ivy’s do not offer scholarships, in general they do not permit graduate students or 5th year players, and for the most do not allow players to transfer in (I realize that there may be exceptions at some from time to time). Maybe I missed it but I do not recall Parents of Ivy players on here complaining that other teams have an advantage or that there should be an asterisk next to teams that win a NC because they have an advantage.
Why don’t you just come clean and tell us all why you are so worked up over this?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Talk about bitter people. The question raised is .... do the schools that have brought back 5th year players and grad players/transfers and are over the 12.5 scholarship cap have an advantage??? Pretty simple. Blah blah about fully funded programs. Again don’t need a wlax history lesson. With all the knowledgeable experts out there can we get an answer

Every year the teams that fund the maximum amount of scholarships that the NCAA permits have an advantage over programs that do not .As far as 5th year players and grad transfers it’s again the same as every other year it depends on the player . You keep getting roasted by the poster that seems like an attorney with no other poster even remotely agreeing w you . Your animonsity of either a player or their parents that go to UNC or Cuse will make you even more miserable when they play for the national championship .

It’s the same as every other year. Really??? This year programs can go over the 12.5 scholarship cap. Some appear to have gone way over. So is that an even playing field??? I guess our knowledgeable experts don’t want to answer question.
So you can go back to the usual
1-only four teams can win the natty
2-SBU stinks
3-Spalina is the best coach.

Oh brother... you state: "So is that an even playing field???" Are you serious? You are joking right? Ha, there is no hope for you. Please tell us that you do not teach your children to complain that "it's not fair". Truly very sad.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Did you even bother to look at ND roster or Loyola , stop with the whining .

Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.

What is egregious? Is there a particular team that you feel has been hurt in some way by the current environment created by the NCAA due to the pandemic? Do you feel that there is some team out there that had a shot at the national championship but now they do not because other programs have more funding? Maybe it's just me but pretty sure the usual small group of schools would be competing for the National Championship anyway. What do you mean by.. "so that a fair comparison can be made"?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Talk about bitter people. The question raised is .... do the schools that have brought back 5th year players and grad players/transfers and are over the 12.5 scholarship cap have an advantage??? Pretty simple. Blah blah about fully funded programs. Again don’t need a wlax history lesson. With all the knowledgeable experts out there can we get an answer

An advantage over who?
What is the purpose of your question?
Are you trying to somehow diminish the success a team has if in fact the team fits your cry?
Are you trying to make a point?
Why are you obsessed with the question?

Answer a question with 6 questions. So much for knowledgeable experts. Ok. Will spell it out for you. Team-A brings back numerous 5th year/ grad players and uses 20 scholarship dollars. Team-B stays at the 12.5 cap. Which team has advantage. Not too hard a question. Not a trick question. Sooooo.....answer the question Kreskin.

Actually, If the team that had the extra scholarship $$, the transfers and the 5th year players were a team that would not usually be considered in the Top 30 and the other team was North Carolina I would say North Carolina has the advantage.

I guess we are getting the answer clearly someone doesn’t like UNC or Ortega kid....NU crushed Rutgers today and Scane had 10 goals on 15 shots.... at least Louisville is ranked..let’s hear you [ChillLaxin] about her too??

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Did you even bother to look at ND roster or Loyola , stop with the whining .

Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.

What is egregious? Is there a particular team that you feel has been hurt in some way by the current environment created by the NCAA due to the pandemic? Do you feel that there is some team out there that had a shot at the national championship but now they do not because other programs have more funding? Maybe it's just me but pretty sure the usual small group of schools would be competing for the National Championship anyway. What do you mean by.. "so that a fair comparison can be made"?

Ahh. Back to the only a few schools have a chance at championship. Funny how you spew the same nonsense. Cmon.... I know you want to say SBU stinks. I understand it takes time for information to get through the thick cranium. And who mentioned fair. To deny that a school is able to offer more scholarship money than another iOS not an advantage is frankly uninformed. Now back to usual drivel..... oh no PSU lost..... they didn’t have a chance anyway.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we stop comparing apples and oranges. Syracuse and UNC brought back numerous 5th year seniors, Grad students and Syracuse has 6th year player. Is it any wonder that they are playing at a higher level. The NCAA decision is what it is but it created the current environment which may continue for the near future.

Did you even bother to look at ND roster or Loyola , stop with the whining .

Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.

What is egregious? Is there a particular team that you feel has been hurt in some way by the current environment created by the NCAA due to the pandemic? Do you feel that there is some team out there that had a shot at the national championship but now they do not because other programs have more funding? Maybe it's just me but pretty sure the usual small group of schools would be competing for the National Championship anyway. What do you mean by.. "so that a fair comparison can be made"?

Ahh. Back to the only a few schools have a chance at championship. Funny how you spew the same nonsense. Cmon.... I know you want to say SBU stinks. I understand it takes time for information to get through the thick cranium. And who mentioned fair. To deny that a school is able to offer more scholarship money than another iOS not an advantage is frankly uninformed. Now back to usual drivel..... oh no PSU lost..... they didn’t have a chance anyway.

It’s not fair, it’s not fair, they have more scholarships, they have 5th players and graduate students. It’s not fair, it’s just not fair. They have an advantage, we could compete if it were fair, if only it were fair....

Penn state and UVA both not top 15 teams

“Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.”

Stacking their teams with transfers tells us all I need to know , please tell us the number of transfers that are playing at UNC this year ,also at Cuse . You really are uneducated in the facts of women’s lax .The only asterisk has to be on any of your children’s birth certificates in the father column as no way any actual women’s admits that tragedy .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.”

Stacking their teams with transfers tells us all I need to know , please tell us the number of transfers that are playing at UNC this year ,also at Cuse . You really are uneducated in the facts of women’s lax .The only asterisk has to be on any of your children’s birth certificates in the father column as no way any actual women’s admits that tragedy .

When you don’t have an educated argument one must spew nonsense about birth certificates. Sorry but you seem to posses a lower IQ. Read the thread. Increased scholarship money has allowed certain programs to retain 5th year students, grad students and recruit transfers. Geez... guess you failed reading comprehension. To reject the idea that certain schools gained an advantage by the scholarship rule change is putting your head in the sand. But with full slate of games we can go back to usual drivel.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.”

Stacking their teams with transfers tells us all I need to know , please tell us the number of transfers that are playing at UNC this year ,also at Cuse . You really are uneducated in the facts of women’s lax .The only asterisk has to be on any of your children’s birth certificates in the father column as no way any actual women’s admits that tragedy .

Cursory quick look at a few rosters and the number of 5th year, Grad students, transfers etc

Syracuse-10, ranked #2
UNC-5, ranked #1
ND-7, ranked #4
NU-3, ranked #3
SBU-4, ranked #6

Now check your kids birth certificate. I believe genetically they are the milk mans kids.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.”

Stacking their teams with transfers tells us all I need to know , please tell us the number of transfers that are playing at UNC this year ,also at Cuse . You really are uneducated in the facts of women’s lax .The only asterisk has to be on any of your children’s birth certificates in the father column as no way any actual women’s admits that tragedy .

When you don’t have an educated argument one must spew nonsense about birth certificates. Sorry but you seem to posses a lower IQ. Read the thread. Increased scholarship money has allowed certain programs to retain 5th year students, grad students and recruit transfers. Geez... guess you failed reading comprehension. To reject the idea that certain schools gained an advantage by the scholarship rule change is putting your head in the sand. But with full slate of games we can go back to usual drivel.

Do you believe that in a normal year when the NCAA limit of 12 scholarships is enforced that it is a level playing field? Do you believe that all is equal? Do you not understand that there are programs that always have an advantage over their competitors? What team do you believe is being negatively affected by this reality?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Penn state and UVA both not top 15 teams

After yesterday they certainly need to drop but who do you put ahead of them? I believe Duke plays Virginia again Sunday and Penn State Plays Michigan again on Sunday as well. We will see... Michigan goalie was outstanding.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.”

Stacking their teams with transfers tells us all I need to know , please tell us the number of transfers that are playing at UNC this year ,also at Cuse . You really are uneducated in the facts of women’s lax .The only asterisk has to be on any of your children’s birth certificates in the father column as no way any actual women’s admits that tragedy .

Cursory quick look at a few rosters and the number of 5th year, Grad students, transfers etc

Syracuse-10, ranked #2
UNC-5, ranked #1
ND-7, ranked #4
NU-3, ranked #3
SBU-4, ranked #6

Now check your kids birth certificate. I believe genetically they are the milk mans kids.

Cursory quick look at last years Final Ranking... without the current situation of 5th year, Grad students, transfers etc

1 - North Carolina

2 - Notre Dame

3 - Loyola

4 - Syracuse

5 - Stony Brook

6 - Northwestern

Not a lot has changed.... Stop the whining .

Actually, allowing additional eligibility due to COVID is a bad decision. Yes it may be great for the grad students etc, but the effect on so many other players including the current freshman and high school players of recruiting age is far more damaging and impactful than the disappointment players who lost a year may have felt. Far more players are adversely impacted than those who would have lost a year.
Using the argument FOR added eligibility, shouldn’t the current freshman also get an added year? Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?

BC just beat up Hofstra like 19-7...North had 6 on 10
Shots last one at @5 minutes left ...you gonna complain about her stat padding too? Or just the kid from UNC...

Originally Posted by The Hop

Actually, allowing additional eligibility due to COVID is a bad decision. Yes it may be great for the grad students etc, but the effect on so many other players including the current freshman and high school players of recruiting age is far more damaging and impactful than the disappointment players who lost a year may have felt. Far more players are adversely impacted than those who would have lost a year.
Using the argument FOR added eligibility, shouldn’t the current freshman also get an added year? Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?

Good decision or bad decision the decision was made and everyone has to play by the same rules. Why is the situation more impactful on current freshmen and High Scholl Players?

No, the current freshmen should not receive an added year. There are always 5th year players and transfers, not playing as a freshmen because you did not earn the playing time over another player should not enable you to have an added year simply because you didn't earn playing time. There are many freshmen who are earning playing time. Life is not fair, nothing is handed to most people it is earned. It is a difficult situation for everyone, do the best you can, where you are with wat you have. Many players (freshmen, sophomores, Juniors, Seniors, Transfers, 5th yr) do not see the field.

The following statement from above blows me away but I guess I shouldn't be surprised:

** "Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?"**

Players / people in general are owed nothing except the chance to compete. Nothing is being taken away from freshmen or any other player for that matter. Players have to earn "playing time" it doesn't matter what year the player is or it they are a transfer.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.”

Stacking their teams with transfers tells us all I need to know , please tell us the number of transfers that are playing at UNC this year ,also at Cuse . You really are uneducated in the facts of women’s lax .The only asterisk has to be on any of your children’s birth certificates in the father column as no way any actual women’s admits that tragedy .

Cursory quick look at a few rosters and the number of 5th year, Grad students, transfers etc

Syracuse-10, ranked #2
UNC-5, ranked #1
ND-7, ranked #4
NU-3, ranked #3
SBU-4, ranked #6

Now check your kids birth certificate. I believe genetically they are the milk mans kids.

Cursory quick look at last years Final Ranking... without the current situation of 5th year, Grad students, transfers etc

1 - North Carolina

2 - Notre Dame

3 - Loyola

4 - Syracuse

5 - Stony Brook

6 - Northwestern

Not a lot has changed.... Stop the whining .

Last year????? So now those rankings count. Rankings after 6-7 games. Oh yea, they are the only teams with a chance to win. AAAAnnnndddd SBU stinks. Almost forgot that one you guys cry about.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

BC just beat up Hofstra like 19-7...North had 6 on 10
Shots last one at @5 minutes left ...you gonna complain about her stat padding too? Or just the kid from UNC...

The best part of that game is that North has clearly taught the freshman stat padding BC superstar how its done scoring in the last 10 seconds of a blowout win is just so unsportsmanlike .Difficult to root for these kids that are clearly just out to just pad their stats .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.”

Stacking their teams with transfers tells us all I need to know , please tell us the number of transfers that are playing at UNC this year ,also at Cuse . You really are uneducated in the facts of women’s lax .The only asterisk has to be on any of your children’s birth certificates in the father column as no way any actual women’s admits that tragedy .

When you don’t have an educated argument one must spew nonsense about birth certificates. Sorry but you seem to posses a lower IQ. Read the thread. Increased scholarship money has allowed certain programs to retain 5th year students, grad students and recruit transfers. Geez... guess you failed reading comprehension. To reject the idea that certain schools gained an advantage by the scholarship rule change is putting your head in the sand. But with full slate of games we can go back to usual drivel.

First off you have no idea how many of the returning players are receiving scholarship money so to even pretend you are educated is laughable . Second you seem to think that UNC has several transfer students playing for them when they have exactly one . Your kids team is non competitive with the best teams now move on and get over it . Cannot wait for Cuse or UNC national championship that will go down as one of the best teams to have ever played with no thought of an asterisk.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.”

Stacking their teams with transfers tells us all I need to know , please tell us the number of transfers that are playing at UNC this year ,also at Cuse . You really are uneducated in the facts of women’s lax .The only asterisk has to be on any of your children’s birth certificates in the father column as no way any actual women’s admits that tragedy .

Cursory quick look at a few rosters and the number of 5th year, Grad students, transfers etc

Syracuse-10, ranked #2
UNC-5, ranked #1
ND-7, ranked #4
NU-3, ranked #3
SBU-4, ranked #6

Now check your kids birth certificate. I believe genetically they are the milk mans kids.

Cursory quick look at last years Final Ranking... without the current situation of 5th year, Grad students, transfers etc

1 - North Carolina

2 - Notre Dame

3 - Loyola

4 - Syracuse

5 - Stony Brook

6 - Northwestern

Not a lot has changed.... Stop the whining .

Last year????? So now those rankings count. Rankings after 6-7 games. Oh yea, they are the only teams with a chance to win. AAAAnnnndddd SBU stinks. Almost forgot that one you guys cry about.

I think that you are the only one that repeats the line “Stony Brook Stinks”. Most on here recognize that they have been one of the Top 10 - 12 programs for many years now. They may not have made the jump to the “Top 5 Programs” but I don’t recall anyone saying that they stink. I love the passion of the Stony Brook Faithful but sometimes they wear the rose colored glasses. You still refuse to tell us all why you are obsessed with this. We get it, some teams have an advantage over other teams . Having an advantage is nothing new , most of of just don’t get your fixation with it. It’s never a level playing field and life isn’t fair. BTW, if JS had your attitude Stony Brook would not win a game.

And last but not least SB's own Ally Kennedy 6g on 9 shots leading 17-11 with about 4 to go takes the last shot.....Anything? or still only that one kid who is a stat padder...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And last but not least SB's own Ally Kennedy 6g on 9 shots leading 17-11 with about 4 to go takes the last shot.....Anything? or still only that one kid who is a stat padder...

Enough, you are going to give this clown with the obsession about an “advantage “ a run for his money.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And last but not least SB's own Ally Kennedy 6g on 9 shots leading 17-11 with about 4 to go takes the last shot.....Anything? or still only that one kid who is a stat padder...

Yes she is just as embarrassing a stat paddler as Ortega , North and Scane . They are all playing as if the only thing that matters is winning the Tewaaraton and it may cost their team a championship . The best player in the country is a defender and I hope she gets the recognition she deserves .Watch these ball hog players when they score late in a game that has already been decided and their teammates can barely congratulate them . I guarantee that these kids and their parents constantly watch each other’s stat lines and think I need to be a bigger ball hog . Give me the player that would rather win a national championship than a Tewaaraton because non of those kids would .

I think it is much on the coaches as anyone with stat padders. Why is you best player in a blow out? I would call that notIntelligent.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And last but not least SB's own Ally Kennedy 6g on 9 shots leading 17-11 with about 4 to go takes the last shot.....Anything? or still only that one kid who is a stat padder...

I would normally pile on here but 6 goal game shot clock 5 minutes to go. Yes you shoot

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And last but not least SB's own Ally Kennedy 6g on 9 shots leading 17-11 with about 4 to go takes the last shot.....Anything? or still only that one kid who is a stat padder...

Yes she is just as embarrassing a stat paddler as Ortega , North and Scane . They are all playing as if the only thing that matters is winning the Tewaaraton and it may cost their team a championship . The best player in the country is a defender and I hope she gets the recognition she deserves .Watch these ball hog players when they score late in a game that has already been decided and their teammates can barely congratulate them . I guarantee that these kids and their parents constantly watch each other’s stat lines and think I need to be a bigger ball hog . Give me the player that would rather win a national championship than a Tewaaraton because non of those kids would .

The best player many years is a defender or a two way midfielder who does her work between the lines. Most coaches recognize this as do people who understand the game. Too many people do not understand what’s important so they only look at goals. That said, to try to diminish the incredible offensive players like North, Scane and Ortega is simply laughable. They are great players. Championship are won with teams that are built from back to front. Go research JMU in 2018 or Maryland in 2019 or any other team... they hold their opponents to fewer goals than their average every time. Syracuse has had some incredible offensive players but they have not won a NC, Florida has had plenty of offensive talent yet no NC... stony Brook has had great offensive talent... Notre Dame has brought in big Li offensive talent.... if you want to win a championship you need an exceptional goalie, an athletic defense and midfielders who can control the middle of the field.
Having a prolific scorer would be icing on the cake but it will never work the other way. You can have the best offensive player in the game but without the grinders the team will not win a championship.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And last but not least SB's own Ally Kennedy 6g on 9 shots leading 17-11 with about 4 to go takes the last shot.....Anything? or still only that one kid who is a stat padder...

Yes she is just as embarrassing a stat paddler as Ortega , North and Scane . They are all playing as if the only thing that matters is winning the Tewaaraton and it may cost their team a championship . The best player in the country is a defender and I hope she gets the recognition she deserves .Watch these ball hog players when they score late in a game that has already been decided and their teammates can barely congratulate them . I guarantee that these kids and their parents constantly watch each other’s stat lines and think I need to be a bigger ball hog . Give me the player that would rather win a national championship than a Tewaaraton because non of those kids would .

The best player many years is a defender or a two way midfielder who does her work between the lines. Most coaches recognize this as do people who understand the game. Too many people do not understand what’s important so they only look at goals. That said, to try to diminish the incredible offensive players like North, Scane and Ortega is simply laughable. They are great players. Championship are won with teams that are built from back to front. Go research JMU in 2018 or Maryland in 2019 or any other team... they hold their opponents to fewer goals than their average every time. Syracuse has had some incredible offensive players but they have not won a NC, Florida has had plenty of offensive talent yet no NC... stony Brook has had great offensive talent... Notre Dame has brought in big Li offensive talent.... if you want to win a championship you need an exceptional goalie, an athletic defense and midfielders who can control the middle of the field.
Having a prolific scorer would be icing on the cake but it will never work the other way. You can have the best offensive player in the game but without the grinders the team will not win a championship.

Nobody has said they are not great players but if you watch each of them this year it’s obvious that a lot of what they are doing is about them getting numbers and not about making their team better . There is essentially no reason they should be scoring late in a game that has already been decided other than padding their stats . While I hope a defender gets the Tewaaraton and your post sounds nice I disagree that the best player many years is a defender or even a two way middy. Say what you want but college coaches many times take their most skilled players and put them at attack where they will never come off the field . Defense is more about team work than individual play .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Syracuse and UNC were noted as they are currently the 2 top teams and appear to be the most egregious in stacking their teams with transfers, Grad students. The same environment exists with other teams just didn’t feel the need to note every team. Bottom line is a number of teams have used the extra scholarship money to stack their teams. Would be nice to see the money these teams have dedicated to wlax so that a fair comparison can be made. ******Asterisk for this years Natty.”

Stacking their teams with transfers tells us all I need to know , please tell us the number of transfers that are playing at UNC this year ,also at Cuse . You really are uneducated in the facts of women’s lax .The only asterisk has to be on any of your children’s birth certificates in the father column as no way any actual women’s admits that tragedy .

When you don’t have an educated argument one must spew nonsense about birth certificates. Sorry but you seem to posses a lower IQ. Read the thread. Increased scholarship money has allowed certain programs to retain 5th year students, grad students and recruit transfers. Geez... guess you failed reading comprehension. To reject the idea that certain schools gained an advantage by the scholarship rule change is putting your head in the sand. But with full slate of games we can go back to usual drivel.

Do you believe that teams do not have certain advantages every year? Do all programs offer 12 scholarships? Do all programs offer the same amount of admissions slots? Are all universities considered equal academically? Do all programs have the same operating budget? I assume that your daughters program must have some advantages over at least some other programs. Not sure why you are so troubled by the current situation.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think it is much on the coaches as anyone with stat padders. Why is you best player in a blow out? I would call that notIntelligent.

Agree, coaches let it happen.

A couple of a things-
To answer the question plain and simple yes the teams with more 5th years are better than others. SU, ND and NW and UNC have many of them. With that said, that is the rules that NCAA allowed so who really cares. The interesting part of this comes in coming years when “extra”money as it did this year paid for the over and above scholarship for the 5th years. Many coaches will be taking money from other players to fund the current seniors for their 5th year. Many schools top players are true seniors that need to be funded by 12.6 that was spent on 2021 coming in as 2017 were supposed to be graduating. Should be fun to watch this balancing act. For example is UNC not going to fund JO, SG, AM, TM, ET. They sure will as will other top schools.

As far as stat padding-let’s look at how bad these coaches are that these kids are playing against. My god have you watched any film on the player. Has any of them heard of a Shut off? a early slide? a players tendency? When she pulls way out we are doubling immediately? a player usually goes this way? a player has 2 assist and 200 goals-so they are pretty committed to shooting and not passing? I would
Like to see a scouting report of these coaches. This is u-9 stuff .

Come on. Do your job.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And last but not least SB's own Ally Kennedy 6g on 9 shots leading 17-11 with about 4 to go takes the last shot.....Anything? or still only that one kid who is a stat padder...

Yes she is just as embarrassing a stat paddler as Ortega , North and Scane . They are all playing as if the only thing that matters is winning the Tewaaraton and it may cost their team a championship . The best player in the country is a defender and I hope she gets the recognition she deserves .Watch these ball hog players when they score late in a game that has already been decided and their teammates can barely congratulate them . I guarantee that these kids and their parents constantly watch each other’s stat lines and think I need to be a bigger ball hog . Give me the player that would rather win a national championship than a Tewaaraton because non of those kids would .

The best player many years is a defender or a two way midfielder who does her work between the lines. Most coaches recognize this as do people who understand the game. Too many people do not understand what’s important so they only look at goals. That said, to try to diminish the incredible offensive players like North, Scane and Ortega is simply laughable. They are great players. Championship are won with teams that are built from back to front. Go research JMU in 2018 or Maryland in 2019 or any other team... they hold their opponents to fewer goals than their average every time. Syracuse has had some incredible offensive players but they have not won a NC, Florida has had plenty of offensive talent yet no NC... stony Brook has had great offensive talent... Notre Dame has brought in big Li offensive talent.... if you want to win a championship you need an exceptional goalie, an athletic defense and midfielders who can control the middle of the field.
Having a prolific scorer would be icing on the cake but it will never work the other way. You can have the best offensive player in the game but without the grinders the team will not win a championship.

Nobody has said they are not great players but if you watch each of them this year it’s obvious that a lot of what they are doing is about them getting numbers and not about making their team better . There is essentially no reason they should be scoring late in a game that has already been decided other than padding their stats . While I hope a defender gets the Tewaaraton and your post sounds nice I disagree that the best player many years is a defender or even a two way middy. Say what you want but college coaches many times take their most skilled players and put them at attack where they will never come off the field . Defense is more about team work than individual play .

IMHO a player has to do a lot more than score goals to be considered the best player. "Most skilled players" you are not looking at all skills... Players like Sam Apuzzo deserve to win the Tewaaraton, simply racking up goals does not do it for me. Most parents on here can only identify goal scorers. Tough to identify all of the things that defenders and two way midfielders do that contribute to a teams success, it's easy to count goals. I have watched attackers literally do (just about) noting for an entire game but if they score a couple of goals people think they had a good game. Then they watch a two way midfielder play great defense, redefend like crazy, be involved in multiple clears, come up with ground balls etc... and many people don't think they did much. You have to do it all in my opinion in order to win the Tewaaraton. Great to see a goalie win it a couple of years ago, very difficult for a defender.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Penn state and UVA both not top 15 teams

After yesterday they certainly need to drop but who do you put ahead of them? I believe Duke plays Virginia again Sunday and Penn State Plays Michigan again on Sunday as well. We will see... Michigan goalie was outstanding.

Penn State rebounded with a win over Michigan today, let's see if Virginia can rebound as well.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple of a things-
To answer the question plain and simple yes the teams with more 5th years are better than others. SU, ND and NW and UNC have many of them. With that said, that is the rules that NCAA allowed so who really cares. The interesting part of this comes in coming years when “extra”money as it did this year paid for the over and above scholarship for the 5th years. Many coaches will be taking money from other players to fund the current seniors for their 5th year. Many schools top players are true seniors that need to be funded by 12.6 that was spent on 2021 coming in as 2017 were supposed to be graduating. Should be fun to watch this balancing act. For example is UNC not going to fund JO, SG, AM, TM, ET. They sure will as will other top schools.

As far as stat padding-let’s look at how bad these coaches are that these kids are playing against. My god have you watched any film on the player. Has any of them heard of a Shut off? a early slide? a players tendency? When she pulls way out we are doubling immediately? a player usually goes this way? a player has 2 assist and 200 goals-so they are pretty committed to shooting and not passing? I would
Like to see a scouting report of these coaches. This is u-9 stuff .

Come on. Do your job.

Agree, there are not a lot of good coaches.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

A couple of a things-
To answer the question plain and simple yes the teams with more 5th years are better than others. SU, ND and NW and UNC have many of them. With that said, that is the rules that NCAA allowed so who really cares. The interesting part of this comes in coming years when “extra”money as it did this year paid for the over and above scholarship for the 5th years. Many coaches will be taking money from other players to fund the current seniors for their 5th year. Many schools top players are true seniors that need to be funded by 12.6 that was spent on 2021 coming in as 2017 were supposed to be graduating. Should be fun to watch this balancing act. For example is UNC not going to fund JO, SG, AM, TM, ET. They sure will as will other top schools.

As far as stat padding-let’s look at how bad these coaches are that these kids are playing against. My god have you watched any film on the player. Has any of them heard of a Shut off? a early slide? a players tendency? When she pulls way out we are doubling immediately? a player usually goes this way? a player has 2 assist and 200 goals-so they are pretty committed to shooting and not passing? I would
Like to see a scouting report of these coaches. This is u-9 stuff .

Come on. Do your job.

I think the NCAA's decision to grant an additional year will hurt what I would call (for lack of a better term) 2nd tier HS players for the next few years. The Top 50 or so HS players in each grade will be fine, these are the players that are usually offered spots at the Top 10 - 15 programs. I think college coaches will be looking to keep their "top players" for a 5th year, they will also look to bring in proven college players as graduate students and they will also be looking to the transfer portal for proven under graduate transfers. Look at Towson, They brought in two graduate transfers from Maryland and the players started from day 1, Towson also brought in a sophomore transfer from Boston college who has also started from day 1. Syracuse has a Grad Transfer from Georgetown who has played in every game starting 3 of 5. So it's not just the Big Name players that are coming in as graduate students or transfers. Programs that do not traditionally get top tier recruits may be able to pick up some as graduate students or transfers. Going to be a little crazy for the next few years.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Penn state and UVA both not top 15 teams

After yesterday they certainly need to drop but who do you put ahead of them? I believe Duke plays Virginia again Sunday and Penn State Plays Michigan again on Sunday as well. We will see... Michigan goalie was outstanding.

Penn State rebounded with a win over Michigan today, let's see if Virginia can rebound as well.

Virginia bounced back as well. This is where ACC and Big Ten teams have an advantage over teams like Stony Brook and Florida when they go into the NCAA Tournament. The competition will better prepare them.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Penn state and UVA both not top 15 teams

After yesterday they certainly need to drop but who do you put ahead of them? I believe Duke plays Virginia again Sunday and Penn State Plays Michigan again on Sunday as well. We will see... Michigan goalie was outstanding.

Penn State rebounded with a win over Michigan today, let's see if Virginia can rebound as well.

The difference is Penn S is swapping wins and losses in close games to an unranked team. Duke and Virginia are ranked pretty much the same, and should be swapping swapping wins.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Penn state and UVA both not top 15 teams

After yesterday they certainly need to drop but who do you put ahead of them? I believe Duke plays Virginia again Sunday and Penn State Plays Michigan again on Sunday as well. We will see... Michigan goalie was outstanding.

Penn State rebounded with a win over Michigan today, let's see if Virginia can rebound as well.

The difference is Penn S is swapping wins and losses in close games to an unranked team. Duke and Virginia are ranked pretty much the same, and should be swapping swapping wins.

I watched both games, Michigan is a top 20 team. They may get hurt playing Maryland 2 x and Northwest 2x and Hopkins 2x as well as PSU 2x let’s see if they avenge their loss to OSU the second time around.

It will be interesting to see what The Selection Committee does with their selections and seeding.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Penn state and UVA both not top 15 teams

After yesterday they certainly need to drop but who do you put ahead of them? I believe Duke plays Virginia again Sunday and Penn State Plays Michigan again on Sunday as well. We will see... Michigan goalie was outstanding.

Penn State rebounded with a win over Michigan today, let's see if Virginia can rebound as well.

The difference is Penn S is swapping wins and losses in close games to an unranked team. Duke and Virginia are ranked pretty much the same, and should be swapping swapping wins.

I guess an argument can be made that UVA and Duke could be ranked ahed of Penn State but I don't see anyone else that belongs ahead of them. Still don't think Stony Brook should be Top 10. Not sure Loyola belongs in the Top 15. I guess just like every other year it will come down to the NCAA Tournament, the cream usually rises.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And last but not least SB's own Ally Kennedy 6g on 9 shots leading 17-11 with about 4 to go takes the last shot.....Anything? or still only that one kid who is a stat padder...

Yes she is just as embarrassing a stat paddler as Ortega , North and Scane . They are all playing as if the only thing that matters is winning the Tewaaraton and it may cost their team a championship . The best player in the country is a defender and I hope she gets the recognition she deserves .Watch these ball hog players when they score late in a game that has already been decided and their teammates can barely congratulate them . I guarantee that these kids and their parents constantly watch each other’s stat lines and think I need to be a bigger ball hog . Give me the player that would rather win a national championship than a Tewaaraton because non of those kids would .

The best player many years is a defender or a two way midfielder who does her work between the lines. Most coaches recognize this as do people who understand the game. Too many people do not understand what’s important so they only look at goals. That said, to try to diminish the incredible offensive players like North, Scane and Ortega is simply laughable. They are great players. Championship are won with teams that are built from back to front. Go research JMU in 2018 or Maryland in 2019 or any other team... they hold their opponents to fewer goals than their average every time. Syracuse has had some incredible offensive players but they have not won a NC, Florida has had plenty of offensive talent yet no NC... stony Brook has had great offensive talent... Notre Dame has brought in big Li offensive talent.... if you want to win a championship you need an exceptional goalie, an athletic defense and midfielders who can control the middle of the field.
Having a prolific scorer would be icing on the cake but it will never work the other way. You can have the best offensive player in the game but without the grinders the team will not win a championship.

Nobody has said they are not great players but if you watch each of them this year it’s obvious that a lot of what they are doing is about them getting numbers and not about making their team better . There is essentially no reason they should be scoring late in a game that has already been decided other than padding their stats . While I hope a defender gets the Tewaaraton and your post sounds nice I disagree that the best player many years is a defender or even a two way middy. Say what you want but college coaches many times take their most skilled players and put them at attack where they will never come off the field . Defense is more about team work than individual play .

And there you have it... “Defense is more about Teamwork than individual play”.

And we wonder why there are so many selfish players.

Go to goal.....

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Boston College
6 Stony Brook
7 Duke
8 Virginia
9 Maryland
10 Penn State
11 Jacksonville
12 Florida
13 Loyola
14 Michigan
15 Louisville
16 Navy
17 Drexel
18 Stanford
18 Richmond
20 Elon

What say you?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Boston College
6 Stony Brook
7 Duke
8 Virginia
9 Maryland
10 Penn State
11 Jacksonville
12 Florida
13 Loyola
14 Michigan
15 Louisville
16 Navy
17 Drexel
18 Stanford
18 Richmond
20 Elon

What say you?

Looking forward to all of the ACC matchups, should be interesting. Don't think anyone in The Big 10 is beating Northwestern but you never know. The Top 4 look about right, not sure Stony Brook belongs at 6 but I don't think they will be bumped unless or until there are upsets in The Big or The ACC.

Virginia Vs James Madison on Friday....
Any chance of an upset?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Virginia Vs James Madison on Friday....
Any chance of an upset?

No

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Virginia Vs James Madison on Friday....
Any chance of an upset?

No

Will be way closer than you are giving jmu credit for, their goalie is very good and the team is well coached.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Virginia Vs James Madison on Friday....
Any chance of an upset?

No

Will be way closer than you are giving jmu credit for, their goalie is very good and the team is well coached.

Should be a good game. Edge goes to UVA but an upset would not surprise me.

Is Stony Brook allowing fans at games?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Is Stony Brook allowing fans at games?

Yes, 2 per player with a negative Covid test within 72 hours

[

Originally Posted by Anonymous

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Boston College
6 Stony Brook
7 Duke
8 Virginia
9 Maryland
10 Penn State
11 Jacksonville
12 Florida
13 Loyola
14 Michigan
15 Louisville
16 Navy
17 Drexel
18 Stanford
18 Richmond
20 Elon

What say you?

I dont see Louisville, best case scenario they finish 5-10. I like Towson or JMU instead.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[

Originally Posted by Anonymous

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Boston College
6 Stony Brook
7 Duke
8 Virginia
9 Maryland
10 Penn State
11 Jacksonville
12 Florida
13 Loyola
14 Michigan
15 Louisville
16 Navy
17 Drexel
18 Stanford
18 Richmond
20 Elon

What say you?

I dont see Louisville, best case scenario they finish 5-10. I like Towson or JMU instead.

Tough to use a teams “Record” in women’s lacrosse as a benchmark. Schedules are not created equal. I have not seen Louisville play so I will reserve judgment. Strength of schedule should always be considered when ranking teams. This year more than ever the selection committee has a challenging task. There will be some good teams left out, it’s just not an exact science.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[

Originally Posted by Anonymous

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Boston College
6 Stony Brook
7 Duke
8 Virginia
9 Maryland
10 Penn State
11 Jacksonville
12 Florida
13 Loyola
14 Michigan
15 Louisville
16 Navy
17 Drexel
18 Stanford
18 Richmond
20 Elon

What say you?

I dont see Louisville, best case scenario they finish 5-10. I like Towson or JMU instead.

Tough to use a teams “Record” in women’s lacrosse as a benchmark. Schedules are not created equal. I have not seen Louisville play so I will reserve judgment. Strength of schedule should always be considered when ranking teams. This year more than ever the selection committee has a challenging task. There will be some good teams left out, it’s just not an exact science.

In the last ten years there hasn't been a team, with a losing record, get an at-large bid. 3 or 4 teams with .500 record and all ACC teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[

Originally Posted by Anonymous

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Boston College
6 Stony Brook
7 Duke
8 Virginia
9 Maryland
10 Penn State
11 Jacksonville
12 Florida
13 Loyola
14 Michigan
15 Louisville
16 Navy
17 Drexel
18 Stanford
18 Richmond
20 Elon

What say you?

I dont see Louisville, best case scenario they finish 5-10. I like Towson or JMU instead.

Tough to use a teams “Record” in women’s lacrosse as a benchmark. Schedules are not created equal. I have not seen Louisville play so I will reserve judgment. Strength of schedule should always be considered when ranking teams. This year more than ever the selection committee has a challenging task. There will be some good teams left out, it’s just not an exact science.

In the last ten years there hasn't been a team, with a losing record, get an at-large bid. 3 or 4 teams with .500 record and all ACC teams.

As stated above, schedules are not equal and conferences aren’t equal either. ND has been bashed on this site repeatedly for their out of conference schedule being weak (which it has been). But the ACC is brutal, I’m sure some very good ACC, Big and even Ivy’s have been left out because their record wasn’t great.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Is Stony Brook allowing fans at games?

Yes, 2 per player with a negative Covid test within 72 hours

Insanity! Doesn’t the stadium seat 10,000 + . 72 hours... another joke. What a shame.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[

Originally Posted by Anonymous

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Boston College
6 Stony Brook
7 Duke
8 Virginia
9 Maryland
10 Penn State
11 Jacksonville
12 Florida
13 Loyola
14 Michigan
15 Louisville
16 Navy
17 Drexel
18 Stanford
18 Richmond
20 Elon

What say you?

I dont see Louisville, best case scenario they finish 5-10. I like Towson or JMU instead.

Tough to use a teams “Record” in women’s lacrosse as a benchmark. Schedules are not created equal. I have not seen Louisville play so I will reserve judgment. Strength of schedule should always be considered when ranking teams. This year more than ever the selection committee has a challenging task. There will be some good teams left out, it’s just not an exact science.

In the last ten years there hasn't been a team, with a losing record, get an at-large bid. 3 or 4 teams with .500 record and all ACC teams.

As stated above, schedules are not equal and conferences aren’t equal either. ND has been bashed on this site repeatedly for their out of conference schedule being weak (which it has been). But the ACC is brutal, I’m sure some very good ACC, Big and even Ivy’s have been left out because their record wasn’t great.

Rankings are fun to look at and debate but it really does come down to the tournament. It will be fun to watch ACC and Big 10 Confere pretty sure they are playing each other twice during the season and then could potentially face the same team in their conference tournament and then again in the NCAA Tournament ....

CAA could get interesting , JMU, Towson, Hofstra, Drexel and Elon should all be completive in conference. Will anyone challenge Loyola and Navy in the Patriot league? Arizona State looks like they are heading in the right direction who will win The PAC 12?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

CAA could get interesting , JMU, Towson, Hofstra, Drexel and Elon should all be completive in conference. Will anyone challenge Loyola and Navy in the Patriot league? Arizona State looks like they are heading in the right direction who will win The PAC 12?

Hofstra has no shot at CAA....

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[

Originally Posted by Anonymous

1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Boston College
6 Stony Brook
7 Duke
8 Virginia
9 Maryland
10 Penn State
11 Jacksonville
12 Florida
13 Loyola
14 Michigan
15 Louisville
16 Navy
17 Drexel
18 Stanford
18 Richmond
20 Elon

What say you?

I dont see Louisville, best case scenario they finish 5-10. I like Towson or JMU instead.

Tough to use a teams “Record” in women’s lacrosse as a benchmark. Schedules are not created equal. I have not seen Louisville play so I will reserve judgment. Strength of schedule should always be considered when ranking teams. This year more than ever the selection committee has a challenging task. There will be some good teams left out, it’s just not an exact science.

In the last ten years there hasn't been a team, with a losing record, get an at-large bid. 3 or 4 teams with .500 record and all ACC teams.

As stated above, schedules are not equal and conferences aren’t equal either. ND has been bashed on this site repeatedly for their out of conference schedule being weak (which it has been). But the ACC is brutal, I’m sure some very good ACC, Big and even Ivy’s have been left out because their record wasn’t great.

Rankings are fun to look at and debate but it really does come down to the tournament. It will be fun to watch ACC and Big 10 Confere pretty sure they are playing each other twice during the season and then could potentially face the same team in their conference tournament and then again in the NCAA Tournament ....

Will be interesting how committee seeds teams based on travel. Seeded teams might play better team based on geography. Im still curious if they add at-large in lieu of Ivies or eliminate one play-in game and put both teams in tourney.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous][
[quote=Anonymous]1 North Carolina
2 Syracuse
3 Northwestern
4 Notre Dame
5 Boston College
6 Stony Brook
7 Duke
8 Virginia
9 Maryland
10 Penn State
11 Jacksonville
12 Florida
13 Loyola
14 Michigan
15 Louisville
16 Navy
17 Drexel
18 Stanford
18 Richmond
20 Elon

What say you?

I dont see Louisville, best case scenario they finish 5-10. I like Towson or JMU instead.

Tough to use a teams “Record” in women’s lacrosse as a benchmark. Schedules are not created equal. I have not seen Louisville play so I will reserve judgment. Strength of schedule should always be considered when ranking teams. This year more than ever the selection committee has a challenging task. There will be some good teams left out, it’s just not an exact science.

In the last ten years there hasn't been a team, with a losing record, get an at-large bid. 3 or 4 teams with .500 record and all ACC teams.

As stated above, schedules are not equal and conferences aren’t equal either. ND has been bashed on this site repeatedly for their out of conference schedule being weak (which it has been). But the ACC is brutal, I’m sure some very good ACC, Big and even Ivy’s have been left out because their record wasn’t great.[/quote

Will be interesting how committee seeds teams based on travel. Seeded teams might play better team based on geography. Im still curious if they add at-large in lieu of Ivies or eliminate one play-in game and put both teams in tourney.

With Covid so much will be geography based to avoid too much travel

Drexwl Vs Albany and Hofstra Vs Stony Brook on Thursday.

Just a thought. Take a look. This could be wrong. Not one Non revenue sport has played for a NCAA championship this year. Only Football and Basketball will crown a National Champion after March Madness is over. Fall sports are supposed to play this Spring but I don’t see anything officially scheduled. I see dates and locations but teams have been seeded or selected. They played conference championships only.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just a thought. Take a look. This could be wrong. Not one Non revenue sport has played for a NCAA championship this year. Only Football and Basketball will crown a National Champion after March Madness is over. Fall sports are supposed to play this Spring but I don’t see anything officially scheduled. I see dates and locations but teams have been seeded or selected. They played conference championships only.

It’s a thought but it’s wrong . Track and field , wrestling and some others have competed for a national championship . No reason to think lax will not make it happen with the vaccines etc

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by The Hop

Actually, allowing additional eligibility due to COVID is a bad decision. Yes it may be great for the grad students etc, but the effect on so many other players including the current freshman and high school players of recruiting age is far more damaging and impactful than the disappointment players who lost a year may have felt. Far more players are adversely impacted than those who would have lost a year.
Using the argument FOR added eligibility, shouldn’t the current freshman also get an added year? Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?

Good decision or bad decision the decision was made and everyone has to play by the same rules. Why is the situation more impactful on current freshmen and High Scholl Players?

No, the current freshmen should not receive an added year. There are always 5th year players and transfers, not playing as a freshmen because you did not earn the playing time over another player should not enable you to have an added year simply because you didn't earn playing time. There are many freshmen who are earning playing time. Life is not fair, nothing is handed to most people it is earned. It is a difficult situation for everyone, do the best you can, where you are with wat you have. Many players (freshmen, sophomores, Juniors, Seniors, Transfers, 5th yr) do not see the field.

The following statement from above blows me away but I guess I shouldn't be surprised:

** "Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?"**

Players / people in general are owed nothing except the chance to compete. Nothing is being taken away from freshmen or any other player for that matter. Players have to earn "playing time" it doesn't matter what year the player is or it they are a transfer.

Thanks for the response.
To use your logic that no one is “owed” anything then why were players granted additional eligibility due to the pandemic? They didn’t earn that eligibility. It was granted due to unforeseen circumstances. Right?
Further, all active roster players were given added eligibility regardless of whether they played or not or whether they “earned” it. Your logic would say that’s not appropriate. Right?
Lastly, I’m sorry your “blown away” by an opinion that’s shared by many within the lacrosse world. Hopefully things will return to normal soon and this great power grab will studied and seen for what it is.

Originally Posted by The Hop

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by The Hop

Actually, allowing additional eligibility due to COVID is a bad decision. Yes it may be great for the grad students etc, but the effect on so many other players including the current freshman and high school players of recruiting age is far more damaging and impactful than the disappointment players who lost a year may have felt. Far more players are adversely impacted than those who would have lost a year.
Using the argument FOR added eligibility, shouldn’t the current freshman also get an added year? Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?

Good decision or bad decision the decision was made and everyone has to play by the same rules. Why is the situation more impactful on current freshmen and High Scholl Players?

No, the current freshmen should not receive an added year. There are always 5th year players and transfers, not playing as a freshmen because you did not earn the playing time over another player should not enable you to have an added year simply because you didn't earn playing time. There are many freshmen who are earning playing time. Life is not fair, nothing is handed to most people it is earned. It is a difficult situation for everyone, do the best you can, where you are with wat you have. Many players (freshmen, sophomores, Juniors, Seniors, Transfers, 5th yr) do not see the field.

The following statement from above blows me away but I guess I shouldn't be surprised:

** "Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?"**

Players / people in general are owed nothing except the chance to compete. Nothing is being taken away from freshmen or any other player for that matter. Players have to earn "playing time" it doesn't matter what year the player is or it they are a transfer.

Thanks for the response.
To use your logic that no one is “owed” anything then why were players granted additional eligibility due to the pandemic? They didn’t earn that eligibility. It was granted due to unforeseen circumstances. Right?
Further, all active roster players were given added eligibility regardless of whether they played or not or whether they “earned” it. Your logic would say that’s not appropriate. Right?
Lastly, I’m sorry your “blown away” by an opinion that’s shared by many within the lacrosse world. Hopefully things will return to normal soon and this great power grab will studied and seen for what it is.

I honestly thought this was a joke, you cant be serious, you honestly believe the freshmen class deserves another year of eligibility? What a ridiculous and utterly selfish thought!! What people in the lacrosse community agree with you? I have 2 daughters playing college and never heard anything of the kind. What happened precious is not getting enough recognition or playing time? Welcome to division 1 sports, your control over the HS AD and coach are over.

Originally Posted by The Hop

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by The Hop

Actually, allowing additional eligibility due to COVID is a bad decision. Yes it may be great for the grad students etc, but the effect on so many other players including the current freshman and high school players of recruiting age is far more damaging and impactful than the disappointment players who lost a year may have felt. Far more players are adversely impacted than those who would have lost a year.
Using the argument FOR added eligibility, shouldn’t the current freshman also get an added year? Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?

Good decision or bad decision the decision was made and everyone has to play by the same rules. Why is the situation more impactful on current freshmen and High Scholl Players?

No, the current freshmen should not receive an added year. There are always 5th year players and transfers, not playing as a freshmen because you did not earn the playing time over another player should not enable you to have an added year simply because you didn't earn playing time. There are many freshmen who are earning playing time. Life is not fair, nothing is handed to most people it is earned. It is a difficult situation for everyone, do the best you can, where you are with wat you have. Many players (freshmen, sophomores, Juniors, Seniors, Transfers, 5th yr) do not see the field.

The following statement from above blows me away but I guess I shouldn't be surprised:

** "Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?"**

Players / people in general are owed nothing except the chance to compete. Nothing is being taken away from freshmen or any other player for that matter. Players have to earn "playing time" it doesn't matter what year the player is or it they are a transfer.

Thanks for the response.
To use your logic that no one is “owed” anything then why were players granted additional eligibility due to the pandemic? They didn’t earn that eligibility. It was granted due to unforeseen circumstances. Right?
Further, all active roster players were given added eligibility regardless of whether they played or not or whether they “earned” it. Your logic would say that’s not appropriate. Right?
Lastly, I’m sorry your “blown away” by an opinion that’s shared by many within the lacrosse world. Hopefully things will return to normal soon and this great power grab will studied and seen for what it is.

I don't know about their logic but all players are have five years to use their four years of eligibility to compete. I don't know why the NCAA made the decision that they made but you are using an apples and oranges comparison, I guess the NCAA felt that the "chance for players to compete" was taken away from them. Current freshmen (unless they are at an Ivy) have not had their chance to compete taken away.

As for the comment about being "blown away" and that many in the lacrosse world share the following opinion:

** "Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?"**

The above opinion illustrates what is wrong with this sport... Parents think that their daughter is owed something, Just read the comments after an Under Armour Tryout or Selection. Parents complain that the tryout or selections are a joke and that the tryout was not fair.

There are freshmen on many teams who have earned playing time this season. Every year on every team there are players who do not earn playing time (freshmen, sophomore, juniors, seniors). Their ability to play was not "taken away" from them due to "grads" playing ahead of them. They all had / have the opportunity to earn playing time.

What will you say when your daughter is a Junior and the coach brings in a couple of stud freshmen who play over your daughter? Will you say "her ability to play was taken away" or will you say "the freshmen earned their playing time".

I'm not trying to be nasty, I just do not agree with the opinion.

Originally Posted by The Hop

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by The Hop

Actually, allowing additional eligibility due to COVID is a bad decision. Yes it may be great for the grad students etc, but the effect on so many other players including the current freshman and high school players of recruiting age is far more damaging and impactful than the disappointment players who lost a year may have felt. Far more players are adversely impacted than those who would have lost a year.
Using the argument FOR added eligibility, shouldn’t the current freshman also get an added year? Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?

Good decision or bad decision the decision was made and everyone has to play by the same rules. Why is the situation more impactful on current freshmen and High Scholl Players?

No, the current freshmen should not receive an added year. There are always 5th year players and transfers, not playing as a freshmen because you did not earn the playing time over another player should not enable you to have an added year simply because you didn't earn playing time. There are many freshmen who are earning playing time. Life is not fair, nothing is handed to most people it is earned. It is a difficult situation for everyone, do the best you can, where you are with wat you have. Many players (freshmen, sophomores, Juniors, Seniors, Transfers, 5th yr) do not see the field.

The following statement from above blows me away but I guess I shouldn't be surprised:

** "Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?"**

Players / people in general are owed nothing except the chance to compete. Nothing is being taken away from freshmen or any other player for that matter. Players have to earn "playing time" it doesn't matter what year the player is or it they are a transfer.

Thanks for the response.
To use your logic that no one is “owed” anything then why were players granted additional eligibility due to the pandemic? They didn’t earn that eligibility. It was granted due to unforeseen circumstances. Right?
Further, all active roster players were given added eligibility regardless of whether they played or not or whether they “earned” it. Your logic would say that’s not appropriate. Right?
Lastly, I’m sorry your “blown away” by an opinion that’s shared by many within the lacrosse world. Hopefully things will return to normal soon and this great power grab will studied and seen for what it is.

C’mon, you can not actually believe what you are saying. Between this and the guy carrying on about the teams with the 5th year and Grad players I don’t even know where to begin or how to respond.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just a thought. Take a look. This could be wrong. Not one Non revenue sport has played for a NCAA championship this year. Only Football and Basketball will crown a National Champion after March Madness is over. Fall sports are supposed to play this Spring but I don’t see anything officially scheduled. I see dates and locations but teams have been seeded or selected. They played conference championships only.

The NCAA announced Men’s Hockey Championship bracket a few days ago... Tournament set to begin March 26 .

You keep saying these players are not owed anything but they should be entitled to fair and equal treatment. The petition that was sent to the NCAA I believe pointed out that the spring freshman D1 athletes were the only current NCAA athletes who were not granted another year of eligibility.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexwl Vs Albany and Hofstra Vs Stony Brook on Thursday.

Drexel over Albany by 5
Stony Brook over Hofstra by 10

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You keep saying these players are not owed anything but they should be entitled to fair and equal treatment. The petition that was sent to the NCAA I believe pointed out that the spring freshman D1 athletes were the only current NCAA athletes who were not granted another year of eligibility.

I’m not sure why you say “you keep saying “ ... there are multiple people in this discussion.

Also, I am not aware of the petition that you referred to.

In any event, Why would current spring sport athletes who are competing be granted an additional year. They have not lost their season. I guess if The NCAA views this spring as an abbreviated season and the want to grant the additional year that is up to the NCAA. But that situation is far different than a player being granted an additional year of eligibility because other players beat them out for playing time.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You keep saying these players are not owed anything but they should be entitled to fair and equal treatment. The petition that was sent to the NCAA I believe pointed out that the spring freshman D1 athletes were the only current NCAA athletes who were not granted another year of eligibility.

I’m not sure why you say “you keep saying “ ... there are multiple people in this discussion.

Also, I am not aware of the petition that you referred to.

In any event, Why would current spring sport athletes who are competing be granted an additional year. They have not lost their season. I guess if The NCAA views this spring as an abbreviated season and the want to grant the additional year that is up to the NCAA. But that situation is far different than a player being granted an additional year of eligibility because other players beat them out for playing time.

The petition is being spearheaded by Hasselback's mother. The father is on TV and has a voice so would I be surprised if it happened - No. The NCAA does not lways make common sense decisions.

The extra year of eligibility should not be about 5th years and playing time. Does everyone realize that ALL D-1 fall and winter athletes this past year were granted an extra year of eligibility! They were granted an extra year before their season even started. Those fall and winter athletes completed modified seasons and even had championships. Even the March Madness basketball players we are watching on TV were given an extra year. Whether it was right or wrong to grant that extra year the NCAA should treat all D-1 athletes the same.

Why is it that the girls who put up a ton of points against lower level teams get all this hype and press? I know you can only play your schedule but a top HS team would give some of these teams a run for their money. You put in 8-10 goals and some assists against UNC, Cuse Northwestern then I can understand but the stat padding against clearly inferior teams is ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why is it that the girls who put up a ton of points against lower level teams get all this hype and press? I know you can only play your schedule but a top HS team would give some of these teams a run for their money. You put in 8-10 goals and some assists against UNC, Cuse Northwestern then I can understand but the stat padding against clearly inferior teams is ridiculous.

I agree with this. Put up some points vs. a top 10 team, and I'm impressed, otherwise nobody cares, and anyone who follows the sport is aware of the shenanigans. I believe formula is used to rank players come time for AA nods based on strength of schedule. This garbage has been going on since HS!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why is it that the girls who put up a ton of points against lower level teams get all this hype and press? I know you can only play your schedule but a top HS team would give some of these teams a run for their money. You put in 8-10 goals and some assists against UNC, Cuse Northwestern then I can understand but the stat padding against clearly inferior teams is ridiculous.

I agree with this. Put up some points vs. a top 10 team, and I'm impressed, otherwise nobody cares, and anyone who follows the sport is aware of the shenanigans. I believe formula is used to rank players come time for AA nods based on strength of schedule. This garbage has been going on since HS!

Below is the 2019 Final Top 20 and How man All-Americans each team had.

1 - Maryland ----------- 7
2 - Boston College--- 4
3 - North Carolina---- 4
4 - Northwestern------ 3
5 - Syracuse------------ 1
6 - Princeton------------ 3
7 - Virginia--------------- 2
8 - Denver--------------- 2
9 - Notre Dame-------- 3
10 - Loyola--------------- 4
11 - Michigan------------ 0
12 - Stony Brook------- 1
13 - Florida-------------- 4
14 - Penn ---------------- 2
15 - JMU ----------------- 1
16 - Navy ---------------- 1
17 - USC ----------------- 1
18 - Georgetown------- 1
19 - Colorado------------ 1
20 - Dartmouth---------- 1

The following Teams were not ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season but each had an All-American.

Duke, Hofstra and Towson.

I am not aware of any formula that is used but it certainly appears that how the Team performs plays a large roll in determining who is selected for All-American. I would also bet that the Top 10 Teams also have the toughest schedules.

A few things jump out at me... Michigan ranked 11th has no AA's. Loyola and Florida each have 4 AA's which is more than many teams that were better than them.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why is it that the girls who put up a ton of points against lower level teams get all this hype and press? I know you can only play your schedule but a top HS team would give some of these teams a run for their money. You put in 8-10 goals and some assists against UNC, Cuse Northwestern then I can understand but the stat padding against clearly inferior teams is ridiculous.

I agree with this. Put up some points vs. a top 10 team, and I'm impressed, otherwise nobody cares, and anyone who follows the sport is aware of the shenanigans. I believe formula is used to rank players come time for AA nods based on strength of schedule. This garbage has been going on since HS!

Below is the 2019 Final Top 20 and How man All-Americans each team had.

1 - Maryland ----------- 7
2 - Boston College--- 4
3 - North Carolina---- 4
4 - Northwestern------ 3
5 - Syracuse------------ 1
6 - Princeton------------ 3
7 - Virginia--------------- 2
8 - Denver--------------- 2
9 - Notre Dame-------- 3
10 - Loyola--------------- 4
11 - Michigan------------ 0
12 - Stony Brook------- 1
13 - Florida-------------- 4
14 - Penn ---------------- 2
15 - JMU ----------------- 1
16 - Navy ---------------- 1
17 - USC ----------------- 1
18 - Georgetown------- 1
19 - Colorado------------ 1
20 - Dartmouth---------- 1

The following Teams were not ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season but each had an All-American.

Duke, Hofstra and Towson.

I am not aware of any formula that is used but it certainly appears that how the Team performs plays a large roll in determining who is selected for All-American. I would also bet that the Top 10 Teams also have the toughest schedules.

A few things jump out at me... Michigan ranked 11th has no AA's. Loyola and Florida each have 4 AA's which is more than many teams that were better than them.

That’s some interesting analysis. Sounds like politics inserts it’s ugly head in at times!

Correction: Colorado had 0 All-Americans.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why is it that the girls who put up a ton of points against lower level teams get all this hype and press? I know you can only play your schedule but a top HS team would give some of these teams a run for their money. You put in 8-10 goals and some assists against UNC, Cuse Northwestern then I can understand but the stat padding against clearly inferior teams is ridiculous.

I agree with this. Put up some points vs. a top 10 team, and I'm impressed, otherwise nobody cares, and anyone who follows the sport is aware of the shenanigans. I believe formula is used to rank players come time for AA nods based on strength of schedule. This garbage has been going on since HS!

Below is the 2019 Final Top 20 and How man All-Americans each team had.

1 - Maryland ----------- 7
2 - Boston College--- 4
3 - North Carolina---- 4
4 - Northwestern------ 3
5 - Syracuse------------ 1
6 - Princeton------------ 3
7 - Virginia--------------- 2
8 - Denver--------------- 2
9 - Notre Dame-------- 3
10 - Loyola--------------- 4
11 - Michigan------------ 0
12 - Stony Brook------- 1
13 - Florida-------------- 4
14 - Penn ---------------- 2
15 - JMU ----------------- 1
16 - Navy ---------------- 1
17 - USC ----------------- 1
18 - Georgetown------- 1
19 - Colorado------------ 0
20 - Dartmouth---------- 1

The following Teams were not ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season but each had an All-American.

Duke, Hofstra and Towson.

I am not aware of any formula that is used but it certainly appears that how the Team performs plays a large roll in determining who is selected for All-American. I would also bet that the Top 10 Teams also have the toughest schedules.

A few things jump out at me... Michigan ranked 11th has no AA's. Loyola and Florida each have 4 AA's which is more than many teams that were better than them.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You keep saying these players are not owed anything but they should be entitled to fair and equal treatment. The petition that was sent to the NCAA I believe pointed out that the spring freshman D1 athletes were the only current NCAA athletes who were not granted another year of eligibility.

What is not fair about getting 4 years (seasons) of eligibility , Like everyone else ?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Correction: Colorado had 0 All-Americans.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why is it that the girls who put up a ton of points against lower level teams get all this hype and press? I know you can only play your schedule but a top HS team would give some of these teams a run for their money. You put in 8-10 goals and some assists against UNC, Cuse Northwestern then I can understand but the stat padding against clearly inferior teams is ridiculous.

I agree with this. Put up some points vs. a top 10 team, and I'm impressed, otherwise nobody cares, and anyone who follows the sport is aware of the shenanigans. I believe formula is used to rank players come time for AA nods based on strength of schedule. This garbage has been going on since HS!

Below is the 2019 Final Top 20 and How man All-Americans each team had.

1 - Maryland ----------- 7
2 - Boston College--- 4
3 - North Carolina---- 4
4 - Northwestern------ 3
5 - Syracuse------------ 1
6 - Princeton------------ 3
7 - Virginia--------------- 2
8 - Denver--------------- 2
9 - Notre Dame-------- 3
10 - Loyola--------------- 4
11 - Michigan------------ 0
12 - Stony Brook------- 1
13 - Florida-------------- 4
14 - Penn ---------------- 2
15 - JMU ----------------- 1
16 - Navy ---------------- 1
17 - USC ----------------- 1
18 - Georgetown------- 1
19 - Colorado------------ 0
20 - Dartmouth---------- 1

The following Teams were not ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season but each had an All-American.

Duke, Hofstra and Towson.

I am not aware of any formula that is used but it certainly appears that how the Team performs plays a large roll in determining who is selected for All-American. I would also bet that the Top 10 Teams also have the toughest schedules.

A few things jump out at me... Michigan ranked 11th has no AA's. Loyola and Florida each have 4 AA's which is more than many teams that were better than them.

Obviously the Top Programs will have the most All-Americans as they tend to bring in the best players year after year.

19 - Attack
16 - Midfielders
10 - Defenders
3 - Goalies.... some really good goalies don't make it...

23 - Seniors
13 - Juniors
10 - Sophomores
1 - Freshmen
1 - Graduate Student

Do not know how many were true to class as apposed to a red-shirt...

There are probably more than 3500 players competing at the DI level earning recognitions as one of the Top 48 is pretty impressive.

To the cynical out there.... No, my daughter is not one of them.... : )

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You keep saying these players are not owed anything but they should be entitled to fair and equal treatment. The petition that was sent to the NCAA I believe pointed out that the spring freshman D1 athletes were the only current NCAA athletes who were not granted another year of eligibility.

What is not fair about getting 4 years (seasons) of eligibility , Like everyone else ?

Read the quoted post again. Every D1 athlete except spring sports freshmen received a 5th year due to covid impact. So, to your point, it would be fair for them to receive what everyone else did.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You keep saying these players are not owed anything but they should be entitled to fair and equal treatment. The petition that was sent to the NCAA I believe pointed out that the spring freshman D1 athletes were the only current NCAA athletes who were not granted another year of eligibility.

What is not fair about getting 4 years (seasons) of eligibility , Like everyone else ?

Read the quoted post again. Every D1 athlete except spring sports freshmen received a 5th year due to covid impact. So, to your point, it would be fair for them to receive what everyone else did.

Pretty sure the NCAA is still going to hold to their 5 year cap unless hardship or extenuating circumstances are involved.

Do you believe that a freshman who plays in every game this regular season, plays in their conference tournament and plays in the NCAA Tournament should still have 4 years of eligibility?

I personally don’t care if they do or they don’t. If the NCAA decides that they will grant it that’s ok by me.

Much different situation than people wanting their daughter to be granted an additional year because “she had her playing time taken away” ..... nobody’s playing time is being taken away ... players earn playing time.

I’m not sure what if anything should be done for players in the Ivy League. They actually had their entire season taken away.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You keep saying these players are not owed anything but they should be entitled to fair and equal treatment. The petition that was sent to the NCAA I believe pointed out that the spring freshman D1 athletes were the only current NCAA athletes who were not granted another year of eligibility.

What is not fair about getting 4 years (seasons) of eligibility , Like everyone else ?

Read the quoted post again. Every D1 athlete except spring sports freshmen received a 5th year due to covid impact. So, to your point, it would be fair for them to receive what everyone else did.

Pretty sure the NCAA is still going to hold to their 5 year cap unless hardship or extenuating circumstances are involved.

Do you believe that a freshman who plays in every game this regular season, plays in their conference tournament and plays in the NCAA Tournament should still have 4 years of eligibility?

I personally don’t care if they do or they don’t. If the NCAA decides that they will grant it that’s ok by me.

Much different situation than people wanting their daughter to be granted an additional year because “she had her playing time taken away” ..... nobody’s playing time is being taken away ... players earn playing time.

I’m not sure what if anything should be done for players in the Ivy League. They actually had their entire season taken away.

Ivy league players all get an additional year of eligibility. They were informed of this recently.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You keep saying these players are not owed anything but they should be entitled to fair and equal treatment. The petition that was sent to the NCAA I believe pointed out that the spring freshman D1 athletes were the only current NCAA athletes who were not granted another year of eligibility.

I’m not sure why you say “you keep saying “ ... there are multiple people in this discussion.

Also, I am not aware of the petition that you referred to.

In any event, Why would current spring sport athletes who are competing be granted an additional year. They have not lost their season. I guess if The NCAA views this spring as an abbreviated season and the want to grant the additional year that is up to the NCAA. But that situation is far different than a player being granted an additional year of eligibility because other players beat them out for playing time.

The petition is being spearheaded by Hasselback's mother. The father is on TV and has a voice so would I be surprised if it happened - No. The NCAA does not lways make common sense decisions.

I just don't know where this ends? If current freshmen are given an extra year, then why won't the next class deserve another year.. and then the one after that.... Every year we will have 5 classes of kids.

Seems like there are a lot of moving parts wit h “eligibility” questions. NCAA will have hands full sorting individual player circumstances out. Do Ivy players who were enrolled last spring have two additional years ?

I am aware of one Penn Grad who is currently playing for Duke believe she was an AA at Penn. Looks like many more around the country on the Men’s side. I think the situation with the Ivy’s could really benefit schools like Duke, Stanford, ND, Hopkins, Northwestern etc...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You keep saying these players are not owed anything but they should be entitled to fair and equal treatment. The petition that was sent to the NCAA I believe pointed out that the spring freshman D1 athletes were the only current NCAA athletes who were not granted another year of eligibility.

What is not fair about getting 4 years (seasons) of eligibility , Like everyone else ?

Read the quoted post again. Every D1 athlete except spring sports freshmen received a 5th year due to covid impact. So, to your point, it would be fair for them to receive what everyone else did.

Pretty sure the NCAA is still going to hold to their 5 year cap unless hardship or extenuating circumstances are involved.

Do you believe that a freshman who plays in every game this regular season, plays in their conference tournament and plays in the NCAA Tournament should still have 4 years of eligibility?

I personally don’t care if they do or they don’t. If the NCAA decides that they will grant it that’s ok by me.

Much different situation than people wanting their daughter to be granted an additional year because “she had her playing time taken away” ..... nobody’s playing time is being taken away ... players earn playing time.

I’m not sure what if anything should be done for players in the Ivy League. They actually had their entire season taken away.

Yes, I do think spring sports freshman who play game 1 through conference and NCAA tournaments should be granted an extra year simply to be consistent with what was done for all fall and winter athletes, and spring athletes last year. The impact on spring freshmen has been just as significant even if they end up with a somewhat normal season. Most missed their entire senior season, fall ball, team bonding, and development during fall practices that were reduced or didn't even happen for some teams. Some freshman, even some top ranked who would be getting playing time, have already decided to redshirt this year because the NCAA did not act prior to the season beginning like they did for fall and winter sports. My kid will be fine either way, and I'm not sure would even use an extra year because she's not planning on a sports related career after college, but I do think the NCAA should be as consistent as possible with their policies. Agree that the "playing time being taken away" argument is not a valid reason.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You keep saying these players are not owed anything but they should be entitled to fair and equal treatment. The petition that was sent to the NCAA I believe pointed out that the spring freshman D1 athletes were the only current NCAA athletes who were not granted another year of eligibility.

I’m not sure why you say “you keep saying “ ... there are multiple people in this discussion.

Also, I am not aware of the petition that you referred to.

In any event, Why would current spring sport athletes who are competing be granted an additional year. They have not lost their season. I guess if The NCAA views this spring as an abbreviated season and the want to grant the additional year that is up to the NCAA. But that situation is far different than a player being granted an additional year of eligibility because other players beat them out for playing time.

The petition is being spearheaded by Hasselback's mother. The father is on TV and has a voice so would I be surprised if it happened - No. The NCAA does not lways make common sense decisions.

I just don't know where this ends? If current freshmen are given an extra year, then why won't the next class deserve another year.. and then the one after that.... Every year we will have 5 classes of kids.

I agree, and her daughter is getting playing time. Her argument is that her daughter lost her senior year of HS. My daughter lost her junior year and is getting a half-assed senior year. Needs to end now, no more extra years.

#6 Stony Brook eeking out a 4 goal win over a depleted Hofstra team is not a great result.. doesn’t bode well for the sea-wolves doing much come tourney time

Other athletes redshirt as freshmen because of the roles upperclassmen all of the time - football being the notable sport where it occurs. There was a setter at PSU volleyball that was a top 10 recruit and redshirt her freshman year because the then senior setter was a 4x AA that was the best setter in the nation. It happens all of the time even without injuries.

Not sure why this isn't talked about more in the lacrosse world...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

#6 Stony Brook eeking out a 4 goal win over a depleted Hofstra team is not a great result.. doesn’t bode well for the sea-wolves doing much come tourney time

Please stop, Hofstra is not a depleted team. Stony Brook jumped out early, The Dutch fought back and never gave up. It was 9 - 7 in the 3rd (if I recall correctly)... Hofstra was controlling the draw and had the opportunity to pull within 1. Credit SBU Goalie for making at least 3 critical saves ... (Hofstra goalie also played well) . SBU capitalized in a couple of situations to hold on to the gap. They are both solid teams, SBU has the edge because they expect to win, they have confidence. If Hofstra can develop a little more confidence they can win The CAA. Stony Brook is a good team and the better team today. In my opinion (and I am often wrong) SBU not Too 10 right now. Hofstra had opportunities, which means their game plan was solid. Couldn’t tell you if it was SBU goalie or poor shot placement but either way the top tier teams will not let opportunities slip away. In the end, two very solid teams . Congratulations to Stony Brook. Hofstra should build upon a good effort.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Other athletes redshirt as freshmen because of the roles upperclassmen all of the time - football being the notable sport where it occurs. There was a setter at PSU volleyball that was a top 10 recruit and redshirt her freshman year because the then senior setter was a 4x AA that was the best setter in the nation. It happens all of the time even without injuries.

Not sure why this isn't talked about more in the lacrosse world...

It’s a money / scholarship issue. Women’s Lacrosse ha a maximum of 12 scholarships (divided between 30 + players). In most situations coaches want their best players on the field which means the top freshmen play. If the player is a second tier freshman why would the coach want to commit to an additional year? The coaches want to use the scholarship $$ on the next top tier freshman.

Stony Brook was outplayed second half, were dominated on the draw circle. They got a few early calls, like a non existent charge that took a goal off the board and a green card for improper stick change after winning yet another draw. 4 goal swing off these plays early.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Other athletes redshirt as freshmen because of the roles upperclassmen all of the time - football being the notable sport where it occurs. There was a setter at PSU volleyball that was a top 10 recruit and redshirt her freshman year because the then senior setter was a 4x AA that was the best setter in the nation. It happens all of the time even without injuries.

Not sure why this isn't talked about more in the lacrosse world...

Will be interesting to see if there are many red shirts on the boys side many electing to PG a year

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by The Hop

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by The Hop

Actually, allowing additional eligibility due to COVID is a bad decision. Yes it may be great for the grad students etc, but the effect on so many other players including the current freshman and high school players of recruiting age is far more damaging and impactful than the disappointment players who lost a year may have felt. Far more players are adversely impacted than those who would have lost a year.
Using the argument FOR added eligibility, shouldn’t the current freshman also get an added year? Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?

Good decision or bad decision the decision was made and everyone has to play by the same rules. Why is the situation more impactful on current freshmen and High Scholl Players?

No, the current freshmen should not receive an added year. There are always 5th year players and transfers, not playing as a freshmen because you did not earn the playing time over another player should not enable you to have an added year simply because you didn't earn playing time. There are many freshmen who are earning playing time. Life is not fair, nothing is handed to most people it is earned. It is a difficult situation for everyone, do the best you can, where you are with wat you have. Many players (freshmen, sophomores, Juniors, Seniors, Transfers, 5th yr) do not see the field.

The following statement from above blows me away but I guess I shouldn't be surprised:

** "Since their ability to play may be taken away due to grads playing ahead of them?"**

Players / people in general are owed nothing except the chance to compete. Nothing is being taken away from freshmen or any other player for that matter. Players have to earn "playing time" it doesn't matter what year the player is or it they are a transfer.

Thanks for the response.
To use your logic that no one is “owed” anything then why were players granted additional eligibility due to the pandemic? They didn’t earn that eligibility. It was granted due to unforeseen circumstances. Right?
Further, all active roster players were given added eligibility regardless of whether they played or not or whether they “earned” it. Your logic would say that’s not appropriate. Right?
Lastly, I’m sorry your “blown away” by an opinion that’s shared by many within the lacrosse world. Hopefully things will return to normal soon and this great power grab will studied and seen for what it is.

I honestly thought this was a joke, you cant be serious, you honestly believe the freshmen class deserves another year of eligibility? What a ridiculous and utterly selfish thought!! What people in the lacrosse community agree with you? I have 2 daughters playing college and never heard anything of the kind. What happened precious is not getting enough recognition or playing time? Welcome to division 1 sports, your control over the HS AD and coach are over.

First of all your personal attacks and assumptions show your immaturity. You know nothing about me but trust that I have 5 times the D1 lacrosse experience that you and your kids may have combined. With that said, you should learn to have a debate without personally attacking your opponents. When you do you show us your weak and uninformed. Your kids will benefit from your example as well.
Also, considering I moderate posts here and know who you are (ip address is a great thing) you may want to tone it down and grow up a bit. People can have different opinions than you ya know, it’s ok. Good luck to your daughter.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

#6 Stony Brook eeking out a 4 goal win over a depleted Hofstra team is not a great result.. doesn’t bode well for the sea-wolves doing much come tourney time

I thought I would watch the battle of LI yesterday and honestly came away more impressed by Hofstra than I did Stony Brook. Hofstra put themselves in an early 7-1 hole and then outplayed SB for 40 minutes. It was 9-7 with less than 10 minutes left and it was not the lack of chances for Hofstra. SB goalie came up big with 12 saves. Overall a very good game to watch.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

#6 Stony Brook eeking out a 4 goal win over a depleted Hofstra team is not a great result.. doesn’t bode well for the sea-wolves doing much come tourney time

Please stop, Hofstra is not a depleted team. Stony Brook jumped out early, The Dutch fought back and never gave up. It was 9 - 7 in the 3rd (if I recall correctly)... Hofstra was controlling the draw and had the opportunity to pull within 1. Credit SBU Goalie for making at least 3 critical saves ... (Hofstra goalie also played well) . SBU capitalized in a couple of situations to hold on to the gap. They are both solid teams, SBU has the edge because they expect to win, they have confidence. If Hofstra can develop a little more confidence they can win The CAA. Stony Brook is a good team and the better team today. In my opinion (and I am often wrong) SBU not Too 10 right now. Hofstra had opportunities, which means their game plan was solid. Couldn’t tell you if it was SBU goalie or poor shot placement but either way the top tier teams will not let opportunities slip away. In the end, two very solid teams . Congratulations to Stony Brook. Hofstra should build upon a good effort.

Are you sure you were watching women's lacrosse? Last I checked, they don't play quarters...

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

#6 Stony Brook eeking out a 4 goal win over a depleted Hofstra team is not a great result.. doesn’t bode well for the sea-wolves doing much come tourney time

Please stop, Hofstra is not a depleted team. Stony Brook jumped out early, The Dutch fought back and never gave up. It was 9 - 7 in the 3rd (if I recall correctly)... Hofstra was controlling the draw and had the opportunity to pull within 1. Credit SBU Goalie for making at least 3 critical saves ... (Hofstra goalie also played well) . SBU capitalized in a couple of situations to hold on to the gap. They are both solid teams, SBU has the edge because they expect to win, they have confidence. If Hofstra can develop a little more confidence they can win The CAA. Stony Brook is a good team and the better team today. In my opinion (and I am often wrong) SBU not Too 10 right now. Hofstra had opportunities, which means their game plan was solid. Couldn’t tell you if it was SBU goalie or poor shot placement but either way the top tier teams will not let opportunities slip away. In the end, two very solid teams . Congratulations to Stony Brook. Hofstra should build upon a good effort.

Are you sure you were watching women's lacrosse? Last I checked, they don't play quarters...

Typical response on here... right up there with the spelling and grammar police... slightly above "thanks mom".

Back to the game... Good game, both are decent teams bud certainly not in the top tier. SBU most likely finishes around 13-15, Hofstra has a tougher row to [ChillLaxin] and will have beat some solid teams and possibly win the CAA in order to make the Tournament. Stony Brook will probably not be challenged until the NCAA Tournament. It is unlikely that they will be competitive with any Top 10 Teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

#6 Stony Brook eeking out a 4 goal win over a depleted Hofstra team is not a great result.. doesn’t bode well for the sea-wolves doing much come tourney time

Please stop, Hofstra is not a depleted team. Stony Brook jumped out early, The Dutch fought back and never gave up. It was 9 - 7 in the 3rd (if I recall correctly)... Hofstra was controlling the draw and had the opportunity to pull within 1. Credit SBU Goalie for making at least 3 critical saves ... (Hofstra goalie also played well) . SBU capitalized in a couple of situations to hold on to the gap. They are both solid teams, SBU has the edge because they expect to win, they have confidence. If Hofstra can develop a little more confidence they can win The CAA. Stony Brook is a good team and the better team today. In my opinion (and I am often wrong) SBU not Too 10 right now. Hofstra had opportunities, which means their game plan was solid. Couldn’t tell you if it was SBU goalie or poor shot placement but either way the top tier teams will not let opportunities slip away. In the end, two very solid teams . Congratulations to Stony Brook. Hofstra should build upon a good effort.

Are you sure you were watching women's lacrosse? Last I checked, they don't play quarters...

Typical response on here... right up there with the spelling and grammar police... slightly above "thanks mom".

Back to the game... Good game, both are decent teams bud certainly not in the top tier. SBU most likely finishes around 13-15, Hofstra has a tougher row to [ChillLaxin] and will have beat some solid teams and possibly win the CAA in order to make the Tournament. Stony Brook will probably not be challenged until the NCAA Tournament. It is unlikely that they will be competitive with any Top 10 Teams.

I believe SB can make the final 8, probably because their remaining schedule is very easy and I do not think they will drop out of the top 8 teams in the rankings. This would get them home field and a possible bye in first round. At that point win one game and you are in final 8. I cannot see them getting past that round though becasue you will probably be facing a UNC, Syracuse or Northwestern.

Hofstra obviously will have a much tougher road. The CAA is very competitive this year. Besides traditional powers like JMU and Towson, both Drexel and Elon are playing well and are both top 25 team IMO. I could see the CAA getting an at large bid this year since there are no Ivies and the CAA is exceptionally strong this year. Hofstra may be te fifth best team in CAA right now and will need to prove themselves now that conference play starts

I keep reading that there are no Ivies this year but I just read Penn is now playing . Will the other Ivies follow .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

#6 Stony Brook eeking out a 4 goal win over a depleted Hofstra team is not a great result.. doesn’t bode well for the sea-wolves doing much come tourney time

Please stop, Hofstra is not a depleted team. Stony Brook jumped out early, The Dutch fought back and never gave up. It was 9 - 7 in the 3rd (if I recall correctly)... Hofstra was controlling the draw and had the opportunity to pull within 1. Credit SBU Goalie for making at least 3 critical saves ... (Hofstra goalie also played well) . SBU capitalized in a couple of situations to hold on to the gap. They are both solid teams, SBU has the edge because they expect to win, they have confidence. If Hofstra can develop a little more confidence they can win The CAA. Stony Brook is a good team and the better team today. In my opinion (and I am often wrong) SBU not Too 10 right now. Hofstra had opportunities, which means their game plan was solid. Couldn’t tell you if it was SBU goalie or poor shot placement but either way the top tier teams will not let opportunities slip away. In the end, two very solid teams . Congratulations to Stony Brook. Hofstra should build upon a good effort.

Are you sure you were watching women's lacrosse? Last I checked, they don't play quarters...

Typical response on here... right up there with the spelling and grammar police... slightly above "thanks mom".

Back to the game... Good game, both are decent teams bud certainly not in the top tier. SBU most likely finishes around 13-15, Hofstra has a tougher row to [ChillLaxin] and will have beat some solid teams and possibly win the CAA in order to make the Tournament. Stony Brook will probably not be challenged until the NCAA Tournament. It is unlikely that they will be competitive with any Top 10 Teams.

I believe SB can make the final 8, probably because their remaining schedule is very easy and I do not think they will drop out of the top 8 teams in the rankings. This would get them home field and a possible bye in first round. At that point win one game and you are in final 8. I cannot see them getting past that round though becasue you will probably be facing a UNC, Syracuse or Northwestern.

Hofstra obviously will have a much tougher road. The CAA is very competitive this year. Besides traditional powers like JMU and Towson, both Drexel and Elon are playing well and are both top 25 team IMO. I could see the CAA getting an at large bid this year since there are no Ivies and the CAA is exceptionally strong this year. Hofstra may be te fifth best team in CAA right now and will need to prove themselves now that conference play starts

Selection Process:

The championship provides for a field of 29 teams to compete in a single-elimination tournament. Sixteen conference champions qualify automatically; the balance of the field is selected at-large by the NCAA Division I Women’s Lacrosse Committee. The top eight teams in the 29-team bracket for the championship are seeded. The top three teams receive first-round byes.

Stony Brook has zero chance of a first round bye. Hofstra definitely has their work cut out for them. ACC could have 5 at large bids, The Big 10 could have 3 or 4 at large bids, Patriot League probably 1 at large bid , not sure what it means but hearing Penn is now playing.... depending on what happens there will probably be 3 or 4 at large bids up for grabs.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I keep reading that there are no Ivies this year but I just read Penn is now playing . Will the other Ivies follow .

Playing three scheduled games all home contests or within 40 miles

Penn state loses to unranked Ohio state. Wow

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Penn state loses to unranked Ohio state. Wow

Yeah, not sure what to make of the Big 10 Teams this year. From what I have seen they all could be Top 20. Only playing each other really does not give any true perspective. OSU's record is terrible but they have been very competitive in most of their games. Not sure if this will hurt Big 10 Teams come Tournament time. I do believe you have to have to be at least a .500 in order to be considered eligible for the tournament. In any event it's a good win for The Ohio State University Buckeyes ! Not sure what to make of the ranking anyway, Stony Brook at 6 is a bit of a Joke, Florida? Loyola? Looks like pollsters are playing the name game with some of the rankings. The NCAA tournament should be interesting.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

#6 Stony Brook eeking out a 4 goal win over a depleted Hofstra team is not a great result.. doesn’t bode well for the sea-wolves doing much come tourney time

Please stop, Hofstra is not a depleted team. Stony Brook jumped out early, The Dutch fought back and never gave up. It was 9 - 7 in the 3rd (if I recall correctly)... Hofstra was controlling the draw and had the opportunity to pull within 1. Credit SBU Goalie for making at least 3 critical saves ... (Hofstra goalie also played well) . SBU capitalized in a couple of situations to hold on to the gap. They are both solid teams, SBU has the edge because they expect to win, they have confidence. If Hofstra can develop a little more confidence they can win The CAA. Stony Brook is a good team and the better team today. In my opinion (and I am often wrong) SBU not Too 10 right now. Hofstra had opportunities, which means their game plan was solid. Couldn’t tell you if it was SBU goalie or poor shot placement but either way the top tier teams will not let opportunities slip away. In the end, two very solid teams . Congratulations to Stony Brook. Hofstra should build upon a good effort.

Are you sure you were watching women's lacrosse? Last I checked, they don't play quarters...

Typical response on here... right up there with the spelling and grammar police... slightly above "thanks mom".

Back to the game... Good game, both are decent teams bud certainly not in the top tier. SBU most likely finishes around 13-15, Hofstra has a tougher row to [ChillLaxin] and will have beat some solid teams and possibly win the CAA in order to make the Tournament. Stony Brook will probably not be challenged until the NCAA Tournament. It is unlikely that they will be competitive with any Top 10 Teams.

I believe SB can make the final 8, probably because their remaining schedule is very easy and I do not think they will drop out of the top 8 teams in the rankings. This would get them home field and a possible bye in first round. At that point win one game and you are in final 8. I cannot see them getting past that round though becasue you will probably be facing a UNC, Syracuse or Northwestern.

Hofstra obviously will have a much tougher road. The CAA is very competitive this year. Besides traditional powers like JMU and Towson, both Drexel and Elon are playing well and are both top 25 team IMO. I could see the CAA getting an at large bid this year since there are no Ivies and the CAA is exceptionally strong this year. Hofstra may be te fifth best team in CAA right now and will need to prove themselves now that conference play starts

Selection Process:

The championship provides for a field of 29 teams to compete in a single-elimination tournament. Sixteen conference champions qualify automatically; the balance of the field is selected at-large by the NCAA Division I Women’s Lacrosse Committee. The top eight teams in the 29-team bracket for the championship are seeded. The top three teams receive first-round byes.

Stony Brook has zero chance of a first round bye. Hofstra definitely has their work cut out for them. ACC could have 5 at large bids, The Big 10 could have 3 or 4 at large bids, Patriot League probably 1 at large bid , not sure what it means but hearing Penn is now playing.... depending on what happens there will probably be 3 or 4 at large bids up for grabs.

Thanks for clarifying, for some reason I thought all 8 seeds got a bye. Even so if they are still ranked 6th at season end their first round game will be the winner of a lesser conference, like a Wagner, Monmouth...etc. Also, based upon Covid they may seed teams and put them in brackets more aligned with geography of schools.

Almost feel bad for a team like Louisville , they are a pretty good team with no chance at making the tournament , the ACC is just too brutal

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Almost feel bad for a team like Louisville , they are a pretty good team with no chance at making the tournament , the ACC is just too brutal

Louisville shows the rest of their games as canceled on their schedule. What is up? Is their season over?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Almost feel bad for a team like Louisville , they are a pretty good team with no chance at making the tournament , the ACC is just too brutal

Louisville shows the rest of their games as canceled on their schedule. What is up? Is their season over?

You must be looking at the wrong schedule . That said they just lost in OT to BC .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Almost feel bad for a team like Louisville , they are a pretty good team with no chance at making the tournament , the ACC is just too brutal

Louisville shows the rest of their games as canceled on their schedule. What is up? Is their season over?

Cancelled or not cancelled, they won’t win another game this year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Almost feel bad for a team like Louisville , they are a pretty good team with no chance at making the tournament , the ACC is just too brutal

Louisville shows the rest of their games as canceled on their schedule. What is up? Is their season over?

Sorry, looks like that is not correct.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Almost feel bad for a team like Louisville , they are a pretty good team with no chance at making the tournament , the ACC is just too brutal

Louisville shows the rest of their games as canceled on their schedule. What is up? Is their season over?

Cancelled or not cancelled, they won’t win another game this year.

Maybe the will win a another game maybe they will not. Louisville is probably better than 70 - 75 teams...
They are just one example of why a teams record is not necessarily an indication of how good the team actually is.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Almost feel bad for a team like Louisville , they are a pretty good team with no chance at making the tournament , the ACC is just too brutal

Louisville shows the rest of their games as canceled on their schedule. What is up? Is their season over?

Cancelled or not cancelled, they won’t win another game this year.

Virginia Tech Vs Louisville should be a good game and Louisville certainly has a legit shot at winning.

Louisville is better than many teams that will make the tournament . They have a chance to win a few remaining games but will still not make it in .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Almost feel bad for a team like Louisville , they are a pretty good team with no chance at making the tournament , the ACC is just too brutal

Louisville shows the rest of their games as canceled on their schedule. What is up? Is their season over?

Cancelled or not cancelled, they won’t win another game this year.

Virginia Tech Vs Louisville should be a good game and Louisville certainly has a legit shot at winning.

Legit shot at winning? Louisville is a ranked team and Va Tech is unranked, they would be expected to win.

—-“Legit shot at winning? Louisville is a ranked team and Va Tech is unranked, they would be expected to win.”——

I was responding to the post that said “they will not win another game”.

Couple of observations , looking at SBU schedule for the rest of the season they really do not have a competitive game left which I would think will hurt them come seeding and being ready for the big games. That said it seems Spallina is at least using his bench in these non competitive games which he has not done in the past.
Huge game this upcoming weekend between UNC and Cuse . Not sure why a sport that needs to promote itself better would be playing this game at 11 am .That said
1) Cuse will win the draw
2) Top players from UNC are better than the top players from Cuse IMO
3) Cuse is deeper in the Midfield but UNC has the top 2 midfielders in this game
4) UNC attack is better than Cuse but close
5) Goal play is about equal
6) Both have very strong defenses Cuse playing high pressure zone , UNC man

I think overall these teams are closely matched with UNC being the better team but with Cuse winning the draw can go either way and very well may come down to which goalie steps up.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Couple of observations , looking at SBU schedule for the rest of the season they really do not have a competitive game left which I would think will hurt them come seeding and being ready for the big games. That said it seems Spallina is at least using his bench in these non competitive games which he has not done in the past.
Huge game this upcoming weekend between UNC and Cuse . Not sure why a sport that needs to promote itself better would be playing this game at 11 am .That said
1) Cuse will win the draw
2) Top players from UNC are better than the top players from Cuse IMO
3) Cuse is deeper in the Midfield but UNC has the top 2 midfielders in this game
4) UNC attack is better than Cuse but close
5) Goal play is about equal
6) Both have very strong defenses Cuse playing high pressure zone , UNC man

I think overall these teams are closely matched with UNC being the better team but with Cuse winning the draw can go either way and very well may come down to which goalie steps up.

I do not understand why Stony Brook would not be in the CAA, geogrphically good and more competitive. Except for Albany the rest of the current league is terrible. Stony Brook had 2 very competitive games against Towson and Hofstra this year and teams like JMU, Drexel, and Elon are better than any team they currently play in conference.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Couple of observations , looking at SBU schedule for the rest of the season they really do not have a competitive game left which I would think will hurt them come seeding and being ready for the big games. That said it seems Spallina is at least using his bench in these non competitive games which he has not done in the past.
Huge game this upcoming weekend between UNC and Cuse . Not sure why a sport that needs to promote itself better would be playing this game at 11 am .That said
1) Cuse will win the draw
2) Top players from UNC are better than the top players from Cuse IMO
3) Cuse is deeper in the Midfield but UNC has the top 2 midfielders in this game
4) UNC attack is better than Cuse but close
5) Goal play is about equal
6) Both have very strong defenses Cuse playing high pressure zone , UNC man

I think overall these teams are closely matched with UNC being the better team but with Cuse winning the draw can go either way and very well may come down to which goalie steps up.

Not sure that Stony Brook should even be mentioned in the same discussion as North Carolina and Syracuse...

UNC Vs Syracuse should be a great game. UNC defense will be the difference in a close game.

SBU and Florida do not belong in the Top 10.

Inside Lacrosse Poll for this week...I am starting to think the Big 10 Womens lacrosse is as overrated as their men's basketball counterparts. Except for Michigna in Men's hoops the others were seemigly overrated as they beat each other up during the regular season. Except for Northwestern in the womens lacrosse are the Big 10's really good?? Maryland at 5-2 as number 9? They will more than likely be 5-3 after this afternoon. Michigan and Penn State at 14 & 15 respectively, both with 3-4 records. Then you have Ohio State at 19 with a 2-7 record.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Couple of observations , looking at SBU schedule for the rest of the season they really do not have a competitive game left which I would think will hurt them come seeding and being ready for the big games. That said it seems Spallina is at least using his bench in these non competitive games which he has not done in the past.
Huge game this upcoming weekend between UNC and Cuse . Not sure why a sport that needs to promote itself better would be playing this game at 11 am .That said
1) Cuse will win the draw
2) Top players from UNC are better than the top players from Cuse IMO
3) Cuse is deeper in the Midfield but UNC has the top 2 midfielders in this game
4) UNC attack is better than Cuse but close
5) Goal play is about equal
6) Both have very strong defenses Cuse playing high pressure zone , UNC man

I think overall these teams are closely matched with UNC being the better team but with Cuse winning the draw can go either way and very well may come down to which goalie steps up.

Not sure that Stony Brook should even be mentioned in the same discussion as North Carolina and Syracuse...

UNC Vs Syracuse should be a great game. UNC defense will be the difference in a close game.

SBU and Florida do not belong in the Top 10.

The problem with saying that they dont belong in the top ten is naming 10 teams that are clearly better.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Inside Lacrosse Poll for this week...I am starting to think the Big 10 Womens lacrosse is as overrated as their men's basketball counterparts. Except for Michigna in Men's hoops the others were seemigly overrated as they beat each other up during the regular season. Except for Northwestern in the womens lacrosse are the Big 10's really good?? Maryland at 5-2 as number 9? They will more than likely be 5-3 after this afternoon. Michigan and Penn State at 14 & 15 respectively, both with 3-4 records. Then you have Ohio State at 19 with a 2-7 record.

All of the Big 10 Teams are strong this year, all could be considered Top 20.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Inside Lacrosse Poll for this week...I am starting to think the Big 10 Womens lacrosse is as overrated as their men's basketball counterparts. Except for Michigna in Men's hoops the others were seemigly overrated as they beat each other up during the regular season. Except for Northwestern in the womens lacrosse are the Big 10's really good?? Maryland at 5-2 as number 9? They will more than likely be 5-3 after this afternoon. Michigan and Penn State at 14 & 15 respectively, both with 3-4 records. Then you have Ohio State at 19 with a 2-7 record.

It's hard to know for sure when they are only playing each other. I don't understand how Ohio State beats Penn State twice in a row, yet Penn State remains ranked ahead of them in the top 20 in both media polls. Other teams lose one game they shouldn't and struggle to get back in the top 20 without beating a top 10 team. Very inconsistent.

Throw the poll / rankings out .... it is very difficult to get any benchmark this. No Ivy’ , the Big 10 only playing each other Stony Brook and Florida not playing their traditional non-conference schedules it’s tough to know just where teams stand. Can’t wait to see what the selection committee does.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Inside Lacrosse Poll for this week...I am starting to think the Big 10 Womens lacrosse is as overrated as their men's basketball counterparts. Except for Michigna in Men's hoops the others were seemigly overrated as they beat each other up during the regular season. Except for Northwestern in the womens lacrosse are the Big 10's really good?? Maryland at 5-2 as number 9? They will more than likely be 5-3 after this afternoon. Michigan and Penn State at 14 & 15 respectively, both with 3-4 records. Then you have Ohio State at 19 with a 2-7 record.

All of the Big 10 Teams are strong this year, all could be considered Top 20.

That was the point in referring to the men's Big 10 basketball teams....everyone thought the same about them and as soon as they hit March Madness they all lost very early except for Michigan

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Inside Lacrosse Poll for this week...I am starting to think the Big 10 Womens lacrosse is as overrated as their men's basketball counterparts. Except for Michigna in Men's hoops the others were seemigly overrated as they beat each other up during the regular season. Except for Northwestern in the womens lacrosse are the Big 10's really good?? Maryland at 5-2 as number 9? They will more than likely be 5-3 after this afternoon. Michigan and Penn State at 14 & 15 respectively, both with 3-4 records. Then you have Ohio State at 19 with a 2-7 record.

All of the Big 10 Teams are strong this year, all could be considered Top 20.

That was the point in referring to the men's Big 10 basketball teams....everyone thought the same about them and as soon as they hit March Madness they all lost very early except for Michigan

🍎 & 🍊

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Inside Lacrosse Poll for this week...I am starting to think the Big 10 Womens lacrosse is as overrated as their men's basketball counterparts. Except for Michigna in Men's hoops the others were seemigly overrated as they beat each other up during the regular season. Except for Northwestern in the womens lacrosse are the Big 10's really good?? Maryland at 5-2 as number 9? They will more than likely be 5-3 after this afternoon. Michigan and Penn State at 14 & 15 respectively, both with 3-4 records. Then you have Ohio State at 19 with a 2-7 record.

In normal years a teams record is not necessarily an indication of how a team stacks up in women’s lacrosse. There is such a wide spread of the top and bottom and everyone in between that you can’t use a teams record to judge them. This year it’s even worse. In most years Northwestern and Maryland are Top 10 even Top 5, Penn State is Top 20 just about every year, Hopkins is always competitive and in the Top 20 or (others receiving votes) from time to time and Michigan has improved in recent years. The Big Ten is a very competitive conference. The top 3 or 4 teams in any given year are generally legit.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Inside Lacrosse Poll for this week...I am starting to think the Big 10 Womens lacrosse is as overrated as their men's basketball counterparts. Except for Michigna in Men's hoops the others were seemigly overrated as they beat each other up during the regular season. Except for Northwestern in the womens lacrosse are the Big 10's really good?? Maryland at 5-2 as number 9? They will more than likely be 5-3 after this afternoon. Michigan and Penn State at 14 & 15 respectively, both with 3-4 records. Then you have Ohio State at 19 with a 2-7 record.

In normal years a teams record is not necessarily an indication of how a team stacks up in women’s lacrosse. There is such a wide spread of the top and bottom and everyone in between that you can’t use a teams record to judge them. This year it’s even worse. In most years Northwestern and Maryland are Top 10 even Top 5, Penn State is Top 20 just about every year, Hopkins is always competitive and in the Top 20 or (others receiving votes) from time to time and Michigan has improved in recent years. The Big Ten is a very competitive conference. The top 3 or 4 teams in any given year are generally legit.

Obviously Northwestern the best in the Big 10 this year, all others are competitive with each other and look very good. Teams are athletic and very solid, it's a shame they can not play outside competition. We will have to wait and see what happens in the NCAA Tournament. As far as Big Men's Basketball goes... I think maybe 8 teams made the tournament, some were upset by lower seeded teams and some upset higher seeded teams... not really a good comparison with women's lacrosse .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Inside Lacrosse Poll for this week...I am starting to think the Big 10 Womens lacrosse is as overrated as their men's basketball counterparts. Except for Michigna in Men's hoops the others were seemigly overrated as they beat each other up during the regular season. Except for Northwestern in the womens lacrosse are the Big 10's really good?? Maryland at 5-2 as number 9? They will more than likely be 5-3 after this afternoon. Michigan and Penn State at 14 & 15 respectively, both with 3-4 records. Then you have Ohio State at 19 with a 2-7 record.

In normal years a teams record is not necessarily an indication of how a team stacks up in women’s lacrosse. There is such a wide spread of the top and bottom and everyone in between that you can’t use a teams record to judge them. This year it’s even worse. In most years Northwestern and Maryland are Top 10 even Top 5, Penn State is Top 20 just about every year, Hopkins is always competitive and in the Top 20 or (others receiving votes) from time to time and Michigan has improved in recent years. The Big Ten is a very competitive conference. The top 3 or 4 teams in any given year are generally legit.

Obviously Northwestern the best in the Big 10 this year, all others are competitive with each other and look very good. Teams are athletic and very solid, it's a shame they can not play outside competition. We will have to wait and see what happens in the NCAA Tournament. As far as Big Men's Basketball goes... I think maybe 8 teams made the tournament, some were upset by lower seeded teams and some upset higher seeded teams... not really a good comparison with women's lacrosse .

So.. the big 10 teams all play each other and are competitive with each other excluding NU. Got that. So what makes you say they are all good. Maybe they are competitive with each other is that they are not very good. You seemed to argue both sides saying they don’t play out of conference but they must be good???

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Inside Lacrosse Poll for this week...I am starting to think the Big 10 Womens lacrosse is as overrated as their men's basketball counterparts. Except for Michigna in Men's hoops the others were seemigly overrated as they beat each other up during the regular season. Except for Northwestern in the womens lacrosse are the Big 10's really good?? Maryland at 5-2 as number 9? They will more than likely be 5-3 after this afternoon. Michigan and Penn State at 14 & 15 respectively, both with 3-4 records. Then you have Ohio State at 19 with a 2-7 record.

In normal years a teams record is not necessarily an indication of how a team stacks up in women’s lacrosse. There is such a wide spread of the top and bottom and everyone in between that you can’t use a teams record to judge them. This year it’s even worse. In most years Northwestern and Maryland are Top 10 even Top 5, Penn State is Top 20 just about every year, Hopkins is always competitive and in the Top 20 or (others receiving votes) from time to time and Michigan has improved in recent years. The Big Ten is a very competitive conference. The top 3 or 4 teams in any given year are generally legit.

Obviously Northwestern the best in the Big 10 this year, all others are competitive with each other and look very good. Teams are athletic and very solid, it's a shame they can not play outside competition. We will have to wait and see what happens in the NCAA Tournament. As far as Big Men's Basketball goes... I think maybe 8 teams made the tournament, some were upset by lower seeded teams and some upset higher seeded teams... not really a good comparison with women's lacrosse .

So.. the big 10 teams all play each other and are competitive with each other excluding NU. Got that. So what makes you say they are all good. Maybe they are competitive with each other is that they are not very good. You seemed to argue both sides saying they don’t play out of conference but they must be good???

I would agree that the Big Ten teams all look pretty good. Traditionally The Big Ten is the number 2 conference in terms of depth. Maryland, Northwestern, Penn State and Hopkins all excellent programs and would be considered by most to Top 20 Programs (Maryland & Northwestern Top 10 Programs) Ohio State and Rutgers have had some competitive teams as well.
Looking back as far as 2010 Penn State finished in the Top 20 in 9 out of the 10 years. In four of those year PSU finished in the Top 10 ( three years in Top 5) and they went to the Final Four twice in that time period. I don’t think anyone needs a history lesson on Maryland or Northwestern... Hopkins finished the season in the Top 20 five times in that time period plus 3 Top 25 finishes so they were considered Top 25 in 8 of the past 10 full seasons of play.... 2010 - 2019.
Do you really believe that all of these programs have just fallen apart and that they are no longer competitive with the rest of the women’s DI lacrosse teams? No, I would say they are all competitive all might be Top 20. The Big 10 hurt themselves by not allowing their teams to compete outside of the conference.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Inside Lacrosse Poll for this week...I am starting to think the Big 10 Womens lacrosse is as overrated as their men's basketball counterparts. Except for Michigna in Men's hoops the others were seemigly overrated as they beat each other up during the regular season. Except for Northwestern in the womens lacrosse are the Big 10's really good?? Maryland at 5-2 as number 9? They will more than likely be 5-3 after this afternoon. Michigan and Penn State at 14 & 15 respectively, both with 3-4 records. Then you have Ohio State at 19 with a 2-7 record.

In normal years a teams record is not necessarily an indication of how a team stacks up in women’s lacrosse. There is such a wide spread of the top and bottom and everyone in between that you can’t use a teams record to judge them. This year it’s even worse. In most years Northwestern and Maryland are Top 10 even Top 5, Penn State is Top 20 just about every year, Hopkins is always competitive and in the Top 20 or (others receiving votes) from time to time and Michigan has improved in recent years. The Big Ten is a very competitive conference. The top 3 or 4 teams in any given year are generally legit.

Obviously Northwestern the best in the Big 10 this year, all others are competitive with each other and look very good. Teams are athletic and very solid, it's a shame they can not play outside competition. We will have to wait and see what happens in the NCAA Tournament. As far as Big Men's Basketball goes... I think maybe 8 teams made the tournament, some were upset by lower seeded teams and some upset higher seeded teams... not really a good comparison with women's lacrosse .

So.. the big 10 teams all play each other and are competitive with each other excluding NU. Got that. So what makes you say they are all good. Maybe they are competitive with each other is that they are not very good. You seemed to argue both sides saying they don’t play out of conference but they must be good???

I would agree that the Big Ten teams all look pretty good. Traditionally The Big Ten is the number 2 conference in terms of depth. Maryland, Northwestern, Penn State and Hopkins all excellent programs and would be considered by most to Top 20 Programs (Maryland & Northwestern Top 10 Programs) Ohio State and Rutgers have had some competitive teams as well.
Looking back as far as 2010 Penn State finished in the Top 20 in 9 out of the 10 years. In four of those year PSU finished in the Top 10 ( three years in Top 5) and they went to the Final Four twice in that time period. I don’t think anyone needs a history lesson on Maryland or Northwestern... Hopkins finished the season in the Top 20 five times in that time period plus 3 Top 25 finishes so they were considered Top 25 in 8 of the past 10 full seasons of play.... 2010 - 2019.
Do you really believe that all of these programs have just fallen apart and that they are no longer competitive with the rest of the women’s DI lacrosse teams? No, I would say they are all competitive all might be Top 20. The Big 10 hurt themselves by not allowing their teams to compete outside of the conference.

These are great details but going back 11 years is too far back. I agree the Big Ten is a very good conference but you can agrue that if we go back to 2017 when most of this years true seniors came into their programs you would see not so great statistics. Johns Hopkins is 2-4 right now in an only Big ten schedule. In the Covid shortened season they were 4-3 with a loss to Hofstra. In 2019 they were 10-8 with 3 of those losses to non Big Ten teams. In 2018 they were 10-9 with 4 of those losses to non Big Ten teams. So in more recent times they are an OK team.

Penn State is 3-5 right now in 2021 Big Ten only schedule. In the Covid shortened 2020 season they were 5-2 with both losses to non Big Ten teams. In 2019 they were 8-9 with 5 losses to non Big Ten teams. In 2018 they were 10-10 with 5 losses to non Big Ten teams. 2017 they were very good at 17-4 and made the final four. Again, they are a good team but have struggled the pas few years as has Hopkins.

I am not sayng they all fell apart but I also do not understand how teams like Rutgers and Ohio State became such formidable opponents in a year. Not playing outside your conference hurst like you said. Ohio State is 2-7 and is 19th in the Country? In the stats above almost half of all the losses over the years were to non Big Ten teams. The point of my original post was really to spell out the fact that it is hard to judge a teams true nationa standings when they only play in conference games...I in no way meant to disparage the teams or their conference.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Inside Lacrosse Poll for this week...I am starting to think the Big 10 Womens lacrosse is as overrated as their men's basketball counterparts. Except for Michigna in Men's hoops the others were seemigly overrated as they beat each other up during the regular season. Except for Northwestern in the womens lacrosse are the Big 10's really good?? Maryland at 5-2 as number 9? They will more than likely be 5-3 after this afternoon. Michigan and Penn State at 14 & 15 respectively, both with 3-4 records. Then you have Ohio State at 19 with a 2-7 record.

In normal years a teams record is not necessarily an indication of how a team stacks up in women’s lacrosse. There is such a wide spread of the top and bottom and everyone in between that you can’t use a teams record to judge them. This year it’s even worse. In most years Northwestern and Maryland are Top 10 even Top 5, Penn State is Top 20 just about every year, Hopkins is always competitive and in the Top 20 or (others receiving votes) from time to time and Michigan has improved in recent years. The Big Ten is a very competitive conference. The top 3 or 4 teams in any given year are generally legit.

Obviously Northwestern the best in the Big 10 this year, all others are competitive with each other and look very good. Teams are athletic and very solid, it's a shame they can not play outside competition. We will have to wait and see what happens in the NCAA Tournament. As far as Big Men's Basketball goes... I think maybe 8 teams made the tournament, some were upset by lower seeded teams and some upset higher seeded teams... not really a good comparison with women's lacrosse .

So.. the big 10 teams all play each other and are competitive with each other excluding NU. Got that. So what makes you say they are all good. Maybe they are competitive with each other is that they are not very good. You seemed to argue both sides saying they don’t play out of conference but they must be good???

I would agree that the Big Ten teams all look pretty good. Traditionally The Big Ten is the number 2 conference in terms of depth. Maryland, Northwestern, Penn State and Hopkins all excellent programs and would be considered by most to Top 20 Programs (Maryland & Northwestern Top 10 Programs) Ohio State and Rutgers have had some competitive teams as well.
Looking back as far as 2010 Penn State finished in the Top 20 in 9 out of the 10 years. In four of those year PSU finished in the Top 10 ( three years in Top 5) and they went to the Final Four twice in that time period. I don’t think anyone needs a history lesson on Maryland or Northwestern... Hopkins finished the season in the Top 20 five times in that time period plus 3 Top 25 finishes so they were considered Top 25 in 8 of the past 10 full seasons of play.... 2010 - 2019.
Do you really believe that all of these programs have just fallen apart and that they are no longer competitive with the rest of the women’s DI lacrosse teams? No, I would say they are all competitive all might be Top 20. The Big 10 hurt themselves by not allowing their teams to compete outside of the conference.

These are great details but going back 11 years is too far back. I agree the Big Ten is a very good conference but you can agrue that if we go back to 2017 when most of this years true seniors came into their programs you would see not so great statistics. Johns Hopkins is 2-4 right now in an only Big ten schedule. In the Covid shortened season they were 4-3 with a loss to Hofstra. In 2019 they were 10-8 with 3 of those losses to non Big Ten teams. In 2018 they were 10-9 with 4 of those losses to non Big Ten teams. So in more recent times they are an OK team.

Penn State is 3-5 right now in 2021 Big Ten only schedule. In the Covid shortened 2020 season they were 5-2 with both losses to non Big Ten teams. In 2019 they were 8-9 with 5 losses to non Big Ten teams. In 2018 they were 10-10 with 5 losses to non Big Ten teams. 2017 they were very good at 17-4 and made the final four. Again, they are a good team but have struggled the pas few years as has Hopkins.

I am not sayng they all fell apart but I also do not understand how teams like Rutgers and Ohio State became such formidable opponents in a year. Not playing outside your conference hurst like you said. Ohio State is 2-7 and is 19th in the Country? In the stats above almost half of all the losses over the years were to non Big Ten teams. The point of my original post was really to spell out the fact that it is hard to judge a teams true nationa standings when they only play in conference games...I in no way meant to disparage the teams or their conference.

You can not judge DI women’s lacrosse by looking at a teams record, there is simply too much disparity among teams.

You say to look at 2017... OK,

In 2017 Maryland finished the Won The National Championship and obviously finished the year Ranked # 1. Penn State finished the year ranked # 3. Northwestern finished # 13.

Hopkins finished the year 11 - 7 and was not in the final Top 20. 4 of their losses were to Top 4 teams ( 2x to #1 Maryland. 1x to #3 PSU and 1x to #4 Stony Brook) they lost to #12 Penn and also to #13 Northwestern in OT Their sole loss to team not ranked in the Top 20 was to Towson who is listed as “others receiving votes”.

To try and say they were not competitive and arguably top 20 caliber is laughable.

It’s easy to have a good record if you don’t play any top teams...
Swap out the 4 game Hopkins played Vs Top 4 teams and the could have a record of 15 - 3 and probably be ranked in the Top 20.

Can’t judge by a teams record in this sport.

Who said Hopkins was not competitive?? I said they were OK in those rcent years. In 2017 I would expect them to lose to #1, #3, and #4. But, they lost to #12, #13 and a HM. I do not think they beat anyone that year in the Top 20 so as far as I am concerned they were not a Top 20 caliber team that year. They were good but not good enough for Top 20 in 2017.

Like you said we will find out at the end of the year. We know Northwestern should be there...but will anyone else from the Big Ten be there as well. In Men's hoops we found out that one team was strong enough and the others were not. I was not comparing sports rather the Covid schedule strategy of only playing in conference games. Good luck to all Big Ten teams...

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

So, because they beat each other and some might not have a favorable record you would assume they are not good. I agree with the point that record is not an indication Wins and Losses is not an accurate way to jerks or rank a team. Theoretically a team could be 0 - 10 with all 10 losses to Top 10 teams. Another team could be 10 - 0 with no games played against Top 20 teams.

Since Hopkins has been discussed I looked at their 2018 season:

Hopkins was 10 - 9 Overall.

Beat # 11 Loyola
Lost # 10 Penn by 1 goal
Lost # 22 Georgetown by 1 goal
Lost # 3 Maryland
Lost # 18 Penn State in OT
Lost # 8 Northwestern by 1 goal
Lost # 5 Stony Brook
Lost # 9 Towson by 1 goal
Lost # 3 Maryland
Lost # 6 Navy

10 games Vs Top 20 teams 6 Vs Top 10 and 3 Vs Top 5 teams...

Five 1 goal losses to Top 20 Teams... 3 of those 1 goal losses to Top 10 Teams...

The Big 10 is brutal, not as bad as the ACC but still very competitive.

Do you really think that all of the teams just all of the sudden became non-competitive? More likely that Michigan, Ohio State and Rutgers are stronger than usual.

Look no further than a program like Stony Brook to see the advantage that you get by having a mediocre schedule. They alway have a great record and get ranked overly high in the polls and when the NCAA Tournament rolls around they lose to a team that plays a much more difficult schedule and in some cases has a worse record (I did not check the records off the teams they lost to) The point is a teams record can not be used because the strength of schedule varies greatly from team to team.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

No, Virginia Tech has not demonstrated that they are competitive.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

So, because they beat each other and some might not have a favorable record you would assume they are not good. I agree with the point that record is not an indication Wins and Losses is not an accurate way to jerks or rank a team. Theoretically a team could be 0 - 10 with all 10 losses to Top 10 teams. Another team could be 10 - 0 with no games played against Top 20 teams.

Since Hopkins has been discussed I looked at their 2018 season:

Hopkins was 10 - 9 Overall.

Beat # 11 Loyola
Lost # 10 Penn by 1 goal
Lost # 22 Georgetown by 1 goal
Lost # 3 Maryland
Lost # 18 Penn State in OT
Lost # 8 Northwestern by 1 goal
Lost # 5 Stony Brook
Lost # 9 Towson by 1 goal
Lost # 3 Maryland
Lost # 6 Navy

10 games Vs Top 20 teams 6 Vs Top 10 and 3 Vs Top 5 teams...

Five 1 goal losses to Top 20 Teams... 3 of those 1 goal losses to Top 10 Teams...

The Big 10 is brutal, not as bad as the ACC but still very competitive.

Do you really think that all of the teams just all of the sudden became non-competitive? More likely that Michigan, Ohio State and Rutgers are stronger than usual.

Look no further than a program like Stony Brook to see the advantage that you get by having a mediocre schedule. They alway have a great record and get ranked overly high in the polls and when the NCAA Tournament rolls around they lose to a team that plays a much more difficult schedule and in some cases has a worse record (I did not check the records off the teams they lost to) The point is a teams record can not be used because the strength of schedule varies greatly from team to team.

Just looking at 2018. Comparing Maryland and Stony Brook schedules:

Maryland played 13 Top 20 Teams.

Stony Brook played 7 Top 20 Teams.

I didn’t bother to look at top 5 or top 10.

Maryland’s schedule was basically twice (if not more) as difficult as Stony Brooks.

Teams that play a difficult schedule should not be compared to teams that do not play a difficult by looking at the teams record.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

So, because they beat each other and some might not have a favorable record you would assume they are not good. I agree with the point that record is not an indication Wins and Losses is not an accurate way to jerks or rank a team. Theoretically a team could be 0 - 10 with all 10 losses to Top 10 teams. Another team could be 10 - 0 with no games played against Top 20 teams.

Since Hopkins has been discussed I looked at their 2018 season:

Hopkins was 10 - 9 Overall.

Beat # 11 Loyola
Lost # 10 Penn by 1 goal
Lost # 22 Georgetown by 1 goal
Lost # 3 Maryland
Lost # 18 Penn State in OT
Lost # 8 Northwestern by 1 goal
Lost # 5 Stony Brook
Lost # 9 Towson by 1 goal
Lost # 3 Maryland
Lost # 6 Navy

10 games Vs Top 20 teams 6 Vs Top 10 and 3 Vs Top 5 teams...

Five 1 goal losses to Top 20 Teams... 3 of those 1 goal losses to Top 10 Teams...

The Big 10 is brutal, not as bad as the ACC but still very competitive.

Do you really think that all of the teams just all of the sudden became non-competitive? More likely that Michigan, Ohio State and Rutgers are stronger than usual.

Look no further than a program like Stony Brook to see the advantage that you get by having a mediocre schedule. They alway have a great record and get ranked overly high in the polls and when the NCAA Tournament rolls around they lose to a team that plays a much more difficult schedule and in some cases has a worse record (I did not check the records off the teams they lost to) The point is a teams record can not be used because the strength of schedule varies greatly from team to team.

Just looking at 2018. Comparing Maryland and Stony Brook schedules:

Maryland played 13 Top 20 Teams.

Stony Brook played 7 Top 20 Teams.

I didn’t bother to look at top 5 or top 10.

Maryland’s schedule was basically twice (if not more) as difficult as Stony Brooks.

Teams that play a difficult schedule should not be compared to teams that do not play a difficult by looking at the teams record.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

So, because they beat each other and some might not have a favorable record you would assume they are not good. I agree with the point that record is not an indication Wins and Losses is not an accurate way to jerks or rank a team. Theoretically a team could be 0 - 10 with all 10 losses to Top 10 teams. Another team could be 10 - 0 with no games played against Top 20 teams.

Since Hopkins has been discussed I looked at their 2018 season:

Hopkins was 10 - 9 Overall.

Beat # 11 Loyola
Lost # 10 Penn by 1 goal
Lost # 22 Georgetown by 1 goal
Lost # 3 Maryland
Lost # 18 Penn State in OT
Lost # 8 Northwestern by 1 goal
Lost # 5 Stony Brook
Lost # 9 Towson by 1 goal
Lost # 3 Maryland
Lost # 6 Navy

10 games Vs Top 20 teams 6 Vs Top 10 and 3 Vs Top 5 teams...

Five 1 goal losses to Top 20 Teams... 3 of those 1 goal losses to Top 10 Teams...

The Big 10 is brutal, not as bad as the ACC but still very competitive.

Do you really think that all of the teams just all of the sudden became non-competitive? More likely that Michigan, Ohio State and Rutgers are stronger than usual.

Look no further than a program like Stony Brook to see the advantage that you get by having a mediocre schedule. They alway have a great record and get ranked overly high in the polls and when the NCAA Tournament rolls around they lose to a team that plays a much more difficult schedule and in some cases has a worse record (I did not check the records off the teams they lost to) The point is a teams record can not be used because the strength of schedule varies greatly from team to team.

Just looking at 2018. Comparing Maryland and Stony Brook schedules:

Maryland played 13 Top 20 Teams.

Stony Brook played 7 Top 20 Teams.

I didn’t bother to look at top 5 or top 10.

Maryland’s schedule was basically twice (if not more) as difficult as Stony Brooks.

Teams that play a difficult schedule should not be compared to teams that do not play a difficult by looking at the teams record.

Valid point for Maryland, however Hopkins has lost to Stony Brook in 2017, 2018, and 2019 the last three full seasons played

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

No, Virginia Tech has not demonstrated that they are competitive.

But doesn’t Va Tech play in the “most competitive” conference and theoretically play the schedule with the most top 20 teams. Point is your record is your record. Own it. Win your conference and go to NCAA tournament.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

No, Virginia Tech has not demonstrated that they are competitive.

But doesn’t Va Tech play in the “most competitive” conference and theoretically play the schedule with the most top 20 teams. Point is your record is your record. Own it. Win your conference and go to NCAA tournament.

Yeah, OK. Get a clue. If Virginia Tech were losing close games or splitting games Vs the Top Teams most would agree that they should be given consideration over teams with better records that play few or no games vs top teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

No, Virginia Tech has not demonstrated that they are competitive.

But doesn’t Va Tech play in the “most competitive” conference and theoretically play the schedule with the most top 20 teams. Point is your record is your record. Own it. Win your conference and go to NCAA tournament.

Yeah, OK. Get a clue. If Virginia Tech were losing close games or splitting games Vs the Top Teams most would agree that they should be given consideration over teams with better records that play few or no games vs top teams.

Problem is they lost to Daivdson. Jacksonville loss not a bad loss since Jacksonville is currently #14. Also, weak out of conference wins this year. They do not deserve to be in any consideration at this time

Tournament selection should be interesting. Very difficult to judge teams this year. With The Ivy's sitting out and The Big Ten only competing in-conference we are missing a lot of crossover / non conference game with some of the most competitive programs. We are missing about 30 - 35% (6 or 7) teams that finish the season ranked in the Top 20 every year. Those programs traditionally play very competitive out of conference schedules and that helps us gain perspective as to how teams compare to each other.

Below is how many Top 20 teams Ivy and Big had each year.

- 2015

Big - 5
Ivy - 2

- 2016

Big - 4
Ivy - 3

- 2017

Big - 3
Ivy - 3

- 2018

Big - 3 and Hopkins ranked 21
Ivy - 2 and Dartmouth ranked 23

- 2019

Big - 3 and Hopkins ranked 22
Ivy - 3

No reason to think that The Big 10 would not have 3 or 4 Top 20 - 25 Teams this year. From what I have seen the majority of big ten games have been very competitive. In the end we will see teams at .500 or below that are probably Top 20 caliber but will most likely not be ranked. The question is what will the selection committee do with .500 Big Ten teams? I'm guessing they will get in. I believe teams with a below .500 average are not eligible for the Tournament.

I believe the saying is "let sleeping dogs lie"...But I had to bring it back up... 5th year players and Graduate Transfers.... I really don't have a problem with it but I happened to watch the Duke vs North Carolina Men's game and I was blow away when I heard the announcer say that Duke had 15 Graduate Students on the roster... Yes, 15. I had to check and yes he was accurate.... I realize many teams probably have a handful but 15 just seemed a little crazy... one of them might win the Tewaaraton Award if Duke wins the National Championship. Believe it or not some Freshmen actually starting....

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I believe the saying is "let sleeping dogs lie"...But I had to bring it back up... 5th year players and Graduate Transfers.... I really don't have a problem with it but I happened to watch the Duke vs North Carolina Men's game and I was blow away when I heard the announcer say that Duke had 15 Graduate Students on the roster... Yes, 15. I had to check and yes he was accurate.... I realize many teams probably have a handful but 15 just seemed a little crazy... one of them might win the Tewaaraton Award if Duke wins the National Championship. Believe it or not some Freshmen actually starting....

Obviously Dad/mom are willing to pay the full freight to let Jr chase a Natty. Just like Syracuse wlax have 10 this year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I believe the saying is "let sleeping dogs lie"...But I had to bring it back up... 5th year players and Graduate Transfers.... I really don't have a problem with it but I happened to watch the Duke vs North Carolina Men's game and I was blow away when I heard the announcer say that Duke had 15 Graduate Students on the roster... Yes, 15. I had to check and yes he was accurate.... I realize many teams probably have a handful but 15 just seemed a little crazy... one of them might win the Tewaaraton Award if Duke wins the National Championship. Believe it or not some Freshmen actually starting....

Obviously Dad/mom are willing to pay the full freight to let Jr chase a Natty. Just like Syracuse wlax have 10 this year.

What’s makes you think mom or dad are paying a dime ?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I believe the saying is "let sleeping dogs lie"...But I had to bring it back up... 5th year players and Graduate Transfers.... I really don't have a problem with it but I happened to watch the Duke vs North Carolina Men's game and I was blow away when I heard the announcer say that Duke had 15 Graduate Students on the roster... Yes, 15. I had to check and yes he was accurate.... I realize many teams probably have a handful but 15 just seemed a little crazy... one of them might win the Tewaaraton Award if Duke wins the National Championship. Believe it or not some Freshmen actually starting....

Obviously Dad/mom are willing to pay the full freight to let Jr chase a Natty. Just like Syracuse wlax have 10 this year.

What’s makes you think mom or dad are paying a dime ?

As usual on here there is a certain jealousy / bitterness / resentment factor.... If people can afford it good for them, if certain schools can keep or bring in 5th year or grad students, good for them (although 15 seems a bit crazy to me)... One thing I have never understood is why people care how others choose to spend their money.

Has anyone else noticed that every year they take a west coast team and build them up in the rankings when they obviously don’t belong . This year it will be Stanford who literally play no good teams for a whole season . Got to watch their last game , good to see they had starters in up by 13 or so and still had them scoring with under a minute to play . They may not win a game in the ACC or big ten but lets promote them like a top team . Can’t we finally admit that the game has not reached the West Coast yet .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Has anyone else noticed that every year they take a west coast team and build them up in the rankings when they obviously don’t belong . This year it will be Stanford who literally play no good teams for a whole season . Got to watch their last game , good to see they had starters in up by 13 or so and still had them scoring with under a minute to play . They may not win a game in the ACC or big ten but lets promote them like a top team . Can’t we finally admit that the game has not reached the West Coast yet .

Why attack the west coast? Stanford and USC have had competitive teams, Colorado has been competitive and Arizona State is on the rise... Please tell us how many good teams Florida, Stony Brook, Loyola etc will play this year ? BTW, some on this site actually believe the The Big Ten is weak..
Hunter is innocent and China is a friend to the US.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Has anyone else noticed that every year they take a west coast team and build them up in the rankings when they obviously don’t belong . This year it will be Stanford who literally play no good teams for a whole season . Got to watch their last game , good to see they had starters in up by 13 or so and still had them scoring with under a minute to play . They may not win a game in the ACC or big ten but lets promote them like a top team . Can’t we finally admit that the game has not reached the West Coast yet .

Why attack the west coast? Stanford and USC have had competitive teams, Colorado has been competitive and Arizona State is on the rise... Please tell us how many good teams Florida, Stony Brook, Loyola etc will play this year ? BTW, some on this site actually believe the The Big Ten is weak..
Hunter is innocent and China is a friend to the US.

Bringing SBU into this just shows how you are uninformed . They have played the two best teams in the country and destroyed one of the “best” teams Stanford will play holding them to 3 goals . Again every year they try to promote some over rated west coast team , it was USC for awhile now it’s Stanford’s turn to be over hyped . Stanford would lose to all the teams you mentioned and all the big ten teams .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I believe the saying is "let sleeping dogs lie"...But I had to bring it back up... 5th year players and Graduate Transfers.... I really don't have a problem with it but I happened to watch the Duke vs North Carolina Men's game and I was blow away when I heard the announcer say that Duke had 15 Graduate Students on the roster... Yes, 15. I had to check and yes he was accurate.... I realize many teams probably have a handful but 15 just seemed a little crazy... one of them might win the Tewaaraton Award if Duke wins the National Championship. Believe it or not some Freshmen actually starting....

Obviously Dad/mom are willing to pay the full freight to let Jr chase a Natty. Just like Syracuse wlax have 10 this year.

What’s makes you think mom or dad are paying a dime ?

I mean, someone has to pay for it, no?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Has anyone else noticed that every year they take a west coast team and build them up in the rankings when they obviously don’t belong . This year it will be Stanford who literally play no good teams for a whole season . Got to watch their last game , good to see they had starters in up by 13 or so and still had them scoring with under a minute to play . They may not win a game in the ACC or big ten but lets promote them like a top team . Can’t we finally admit that the game has not reached the West Coast yet .

Why attack the west coast? Stanford and USC have had competitive teams, Colorado has been competitive and Arizona State is on the rise... Please tell us how many good teams Florida, Stony Brook, Loyola etc will play this year ? BTW, some on this site actually believe the The Big Ten is weak..
Hunter is innocent and China is a friend to the US.

Bringing SBU into this just shows how you are uninformed . They have played the two best teams in the country and destroyed one of the “best” teams Stanford will play holding them to 3 goals . Again every year they try to promote some over rated west coast team , it was USC for awhile now it’s Stanford’s turn to be over hyped . Stanford would lose to all the teams you mentioned and all the big ten teams .

The most overrated, overhyped program in the history of women’s lacrosse is Stony Brook. Yes, they played two of the best teams this year and were blown out by both. The play a relatively weak schedule every year and have actually done nothing to justify their lofty rankings. Good program, good players, good coach but overall way overhyped.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Has anyone else noticed that every year they take a west coast team and build them up in the rankings when they obviously don’t belong . This year it will be Stanford who literally play no good teams for a whole season . Got to watch their last game , good to see they had starters in up by 13 or so and still had them scoring with under a minute to play . They may not win a game in the ACC or big ten but lets promote them like a top team . Can’t we finally admit that the game has not reached the West Coast yet .

Why attack the west coast? Stanford and USC have had competitive teams, Colorado has been competitive and Arizona State is on the rise... Please tell us how many good teams Florida, Stony Brook, Loyola etc will play this year ? BTW, some on this site actually believe the The Big Ten is weak..
Hunter is innocent and China is a friend to the US.

Bringing SBU into this just shows how you are uninformed . They have played the two best teams in the country and destroyed one of the “best” teams Stanford will play holding them to 3 goals . Again every year they try to promote some over rated west coast team , it was USC for awhile now it’s Stanford’s turn to be over hyped . Stanford would lose to all the teams you mentioned and all the big ten teams .

The most overrated, overhyped program in the history of women’s lacrosse is Stony Brook. Yes, they played two of the best teams this year and were blown out by both. The play a relatively weak schedule every year and have actually done nothing to justify their lofty rankings. Good program, good players, good coach but overall way overhyped.

And I guess the Pac-12 teams play a tough schedule. Geez. SBU will beat every Pac-12 team and the SBU subs will get playing time in those games.

Cuse/ UNC was a eye opener. Also in the respect to who the real superstars are for UNC are, and more importantly who they aren’t!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Has anyone else noticed that every year they take a west coast team and build them up in the rankings when they obviously don’t belong . This year it will be Stanford who literally play no good teams for a whole season . Got to watch their last game , good to see they had starters in up by 13 or so and still had them scoring with under a minute to play . They may not win a game in the ACC or big ten but lets promote them like a top team . Can’t we finally admit that the game has not reached the West Coast yet .

Why attack the west coast? Stanford and USC have had competitive teams, Colorado has been competitive and Arizona State is on the rise... Please tell us how many good teams Florida, Stony Brook, Loyola etc will play this year ? BTW, some on this site actually believe the The Big Ten is weak..
Hunter is innocent and China is a friend to the US.

Bringing SBU into this just shows how you are uninformed . They have played the two best teams in the country and destroyed one of the “best” teams Stanford will play holding them to 3 goals . Again every year they try to promote some over rated west coast team , it was USC for awhile now it’s Stanford’s turn to be over hyped . Stanford would lose to all the teams you mentioned and all the big ten teams .

The most overrated, overhyped program in the history of women’s lacrosse is Stony Brook. Yes, they played two of the best teams this year and were blown out by both. The play a relatively weak schedule every year and have actually done nothing to justify their lofty rankings. Good program, good players, good coach but overall way overhyped.

And I guess the Pac-12 teams play a tough schedule. Geez. SBU will beat every Pac-12 team and the SBU subs will get playing time in those games.

Who cares if they can beat PAC 12 teams? As the post said, Stony Brook is the most overrated, overhyped program in the history of women’s lacrosse.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Has anyone else noticed that every year they take a west coast team and build them up in the rankings when they obviously don’t belong . This year it will be Stanford who literally play no good teams for a whole season . Got to watch their last game , good to see they had starters in up by 13 or so and still had them scoring with under a minute to play . They may not win a game in the ACC or big ten but lets promote them like a top team . Can’t we finally admit that the game has not reached the West Coast yet .

Why attack the west coast? Stanford and USC have had competitive teams, Colorado has been competitive and Arizona State is on the rise... Please tell us how many good teams Florida, Stony Brook, Loyola etc will play this year ? BTW, some on this site actually believe the The Big Ten is weak..
Hunter is innocent and China is a friend to the US.

Bringing SBU into this just shows how you are uninformed . They have played the two best teams in the country and destroyed one of the “best” teams Stanford will play holding them to 3 goals . Again every year they try to promote some over rated west coast team , it was USC for awhile now it’s Stanford’s turn to be over hyped . Stanford would lose to all the teams you mentioned and all the big ten teams .

The most overrated, overhyped program in the history of women’s lacrosse is Stony Brook. Yes, they played two of the best teams this year and were blown out by both. The play a relatively weak schedule every year and have actually done nothing to justify their lofty rankings. Good program, good players, good coach but overall way overhyped.

And I guess the Pac-12 teams play a tough schedule. Geez. SBU will beat every Pac-12 team and the SBU subs will get playing time in those games.

Who cares if they can beat PAC 12 teams? As the post said, Stony Brook is the most overrated, overhyped program in the history of women’s lacrosse.

Oh boy......did you not read the starting quote of the thread. I will recap for you since you obviously didnt.....Western teams overhyped....the counter argument...No SBU most over-rated in wlax history....Soooo western teams overhyped vs SBU overhyped.....interesting question.....SBU will easily beat western teams....Therefore it appears the Western teams are most overhyped. Now go and watch some Perry Mason re-runs

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Cuse/ UNC was a eye opener. Also in the respect to who the real superstars are for UNC are, and more importantly who they aren’t!

You need to get a life . A great team wins convincingly and you feel the need to try and knock down a young women and honestly no one knows who you are speaking about as that whole team played well .

Team Defense / Athleticism on the defense and through the middle of the field / Goalie = National Championship.

Yes, you have to score goals but having a high powered offense will not hep you win if you are lacking in the other areas.

As the sayings go, pitching beats hitting and defense wins championships.

Teams with the athletes and courage to play Man to man should be applauded! Toughest thing to do in women’s lacrosse is be put on an island out in space and be asked to defend 1 v 1. (Goalie have it tough as well 😃).

Carolina offense is fantastic but they would win if it were only average. They would Not win with the same offense if they were average on the back end or through the middle.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Has anyone else noticed that every year they take a west coast team and build them up in the rankings when they obviously don’t belong . This year it will be Stanford who literally play no good teams for a whole season . Got to watch their last game , good to see they had starters in up by 13 or so and still had them scoring with under a minute to play . They may not win a game in the ACC or big ten but lets promote them like a top team . Can’t we finally admit that the game has not reached the West Coast yet .

.

Oh boy......did you not read the starting quote of the thread. I will recap for you since you obviously didnt.....Western teams overhyped....the counter argument...No SBU most over-rated in wlax history....Soooo western teams overhyped vs SBU overhyped.....interesting question.....SBU will easily beat western teams....Therefore it appears the Western teams are most overhyped. Now go and watch some Perry Mason re-runs

The original post came out of the blue and attacked the west coast teams as a whole claiming they are overhyped in the rankings every year. It was then pointed out that Stony Brook has been the most overrated / overhyped team in the history (many years...) in all of women’s lacrosse. It was not argued that this particular year Stony Brook not beat the west coast teams. The point was simple, Stony Brook has been the most overrated / overhyped program of all.

The funny thing is that stony Brook is notorious for doing exactly what you say Stanford is doing which is running up the score on week teams and padding stats.

I’m not sure why the assessment upset you.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Cuse/ UNC was a eye opener. Also in the respect to who the real superstars are for UNC are, and more importantly who they aren’t!

You need to get a life . A great team wins convincingly and you feel the need to try and knock down a young women and honestly no one knows who you are speaking about as that whole team played well .

Why so angry? Just an observation about lax on a lax forum. Certain girls have clearly separated themselves from the pack over the last few games. Great team win and that JO is on a different level!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Cuse/ UNC was a eye opener. Also in the respect to who the real superstars are for UNC are, and more importantly who they aren’t!

You need to get a life . A great team wins convincingly and you feel the need to try and knock down a young women and honestly no one knows who you are speaking about as that whole team played well .

Why so angry? Just an observation about lax on a lax forum. Certain girls have clearly separated themselves from the pack over the last few games. Great team win and that JO is on a different level!

Yes angry that some obviously jealous dad states that the most important part of a game between the two best teams in country was that it revealed who the real superstars aren’t . You obviously have an ax to grind with some player and yet are too cowardly to actually name them . You should speak your mind to the father of the player you feel is so overrated .

Syracuse needs to drop out of the top 5. Northwestern is the clear #2 and might be number one. NW has the best player in the country, UNC has the next 2. Big drop off after that.

When will everyone start focusing more on the Carolina defense. On average they hold teams to only about 6 goals per game (with a shot clock where there are more possessions per game). It is nearly impossible to lose when you completely dominate games defensively and at least play even on the draw. You could take away their best offensive player and they would still be undefeated and favorites to win it all.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

When will everyone start focusing more on the Carolina defense. On average they hold teams to only about 6 goals per game (with a shot clock where there are more possessions per game). It is nearly impossible to lose when you completely dominate games defensively and at least play even on the draw. You could take away their best offensive player and they would still be undefeated and favorites to win it all.

UNC attack is fantastic maybe the best out there. But you are correct, it is their Goalie, Defense and Midfielders that sets them apart. This is nothing new, scoring goals will always garner the attention but it is team defense that wins championships. North Carolina could win the National Championship this year with an average attack and their attack is far from average, they might be the best unit out there.

To answer your question... “When will everyone start focusing on the Carolina Defense?”... The answer is “Never”... most lacrosse parents can only recognize goals, have very little understanding of the game and will never be able to recognize, quantify the value of any player not scoring goals.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse needs to drop out of the top 5. Northwestern is the clear #2 and might be number one. NW has the best player in the country, UNC has the next 2. Big drop off after that.

NU plays in a pretty tame conference. Not like ACC
Scane can score goals but does she do anything else? Does she make players around her better. Thats what makes you #1

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse needs to drop out of the top 5. Northwestern is the clear #2 and might be number one. NW has the best player in the country, UNC has the next 2. Big drop off after that.

NU plays in a pretty tame conference. Not like ACC
Scane can score goals but does she do anything else? Does she make players around her better. Thats what makes you #1

Same seems to be true of the top UNC point leaders. All these girls will be Tewaaraton finalists

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse needs to drop out of the top 5. Northwestern is the clear #2 and might be number one. NW has the best player in the country, UNC has the next 2. Big drop off after that.

NU plays in a pretty tame conference. Not like ACC
Scane can score goals but does she do anything else? Does she make players around her better. Thats what makes you #1

Yeah, OK...

There is one formula to beating UNC.

You have to play Man to Man defense. The teams that have done this have had good success. Duke, UF and BC were close games at half. Don’t get me wrong the this final score were different stories but the over strategy of Man to Man hard pressure on ball worked especially for UF. KH and JO have a unique chemistry on field. So you at least need to take one away. They don’t beat you 1v1 very often to be honest. It is quick off ball cutting and passing. Secondly the goalie has to have a big game-15 to 18 saves. Lastly, you need UNC to have soon offensive sets where they simply don’t take care of the ball, and have unforced turnovers .

But as mentioned above you have to score 10-12 goals to win. That has been nearly impossible against UNC. If there is a little break down on the 1v1 D TM has been excellent all year at making that save. Otherwise most shots are being highly contested. UNC doesn’t slide fast. They trust the one v one match up which last year in NW almost cost them the game.

As you can see it takes almost a perfect effort by an opponent as nothing can breakdown, and a lot has to go right for the team game plan.

But you won’t win playing a zone against them

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse needs to drop out of the top 5. Northwestern is the clear #2 and might be number one. NW has the best player in the country, UNC has the next 2. Big drop off after that.

NU plays in a pretty tame conference. Not like ACC
Scane can score goals but does she do anything else? Does she make players around her better. Thats what makes you #1

Yeah, OK...

Ok so if its all about scoring goals why didn't Olhmiller win? Or why didn't Murphy make final 5?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse needs to drop out of the top 5. Northwestern is the clear #2 and might be number one. NW has the best player in the country, UNC has the next 2. Big drop off after that.

NU plays in a pretty tame conference. Not like ACC
Scane can score goals but does she do anything else? Does she make players around her better. Thats what makes you #1

Yeah, OK...

Ok so if its all about scoring goals why didn't Olhmiller win? Or why didn't Murphy make final 5?

Because you have to perform consistently while playing a tough schedule, while also playing for a Top Team... Final Four / National Championship Caliber Team. 17 of the 19 Winners played for ACC or Big 10 Teams (current conference alignment). One player from Georgetown and One from Princeton.

Sorry but if the player is not competing against tough teams the numbers are discounted.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse needs to drop out of the top 5. Northwestern is the clear #2 and might be number one. NW has the best player in the country, UNC has the next 2. Big drop off after that.

NU plays in a pretty tame conference. Not like ACC
Scane can score goals but does she do anything else? Does she make players around her better. Thats what makes you #1

Yeah, OK...

Ok so if its all about scoring goals why didn't Olhmiller win? Or why didn't Murphy make final 5?

Well Ohlmiller should have won her Junior year.. was more of a force then stukenberg.. but the committee went with the Maryland kid as is their norm.

Izzy Scane or Jamie Ortega get it. Nobody else close

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse needs to drop out of the top 5. Northwestern is the clear #2 and might be number one. NW has the best player in the country, UNC has the next 2. Big drop off after that.

Seriously , they lost to the best team in the country, they dominated #4, #5,#10, and beat ND #4 two times.Other than NW and UNC who would you put ahead of them.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse needs to drop out of the top 5. Northwestern is the clear #2 and might be number one. NW has the best player in the country, UNC has the next 2. Big drop off after that.

NU plays in a pretty tame conference. Not like ACC
Scane can score goals but does she do anything else? Does she make players around her better. Thats what makes you #1

Yeah, OK...

Ok so if its all about scoring goals why didn't Olhmiller win? Or why didn't Murphy make final 5?

Well Ohlmiller should have won her Junior year.. was more of a force then stukenberg.. but the committee went with the Maryland kid as is their norm.

Sorry but no she should not have won it. Just as with ranking teams, strength of schedule has to be a major factor. When looking at both the Maryland and Stony Brook schedules for that year (2017) there is no comparison.

Maryland played:

14 games Vs Top 20 teams.
10 of those were Vs Top 10 teams.
7 of those were Vs Top 5 teams.

Stony Brook played:

6 games Vs Top 20 teams.
3 of those were Vs Top 10 teams.
1 of those Vs Top 5 Team.

Strength of schedule changes everything. Team record, player statistics, team ranking, tournament seeding, everything.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse needs to drop out of the top 5. Northwestern is the clear #2 and might be number one. NW has the best player in the country, UNC has the next 2. Big drop off after that.

Seriously , they lost to the best team in the country, they dominated #4, #5,#10, and beat ND #4 two times.Other than NW and UNC who would you put ahead of them.

Tend to agree. Big Ten playing in-conference only, no Ivy’s, and limited out of conference games in general it’s difficult to assess how teams stack up.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There is one formula to beating UNC.

You have to play Man to Man defense. The teams that have done this have had good success. Duke, UF and BC were close games at half. Don’t get me wrong the this final score were different stories but the over strategy of Man to Man hard pressure on ball worked especially for UF. KH and JO have a unique chemistry on field. So you at least need to take one away. They don’t beat you 1v1 very often to be honest. It is quick off ball cutting and passing. Secondly the goalie has to have a big game-15 to 18 saves. Lastly, you need UNC to have soon offensive sets where they simply don’t take care of the ball, and have unforced turnovers .

But as mentioned above you have to score 10-12 goals to win. That has been nearly impossible against UNC. If there is a little break down on the 1v1 D TM has been excellent all year at making that save. Otherwise most shots are being highly contested. UNC doesn’t slide fast. They trust the one v one match up which last year in NW almost cost them the game.

As you can see it takes almost a perfect effort by an opponent as nothing can breakdown, and a lot has to go right for the team game plan.

But you won’t win playing a zone against them

Get over yourself. Your man to man must play nonsense is laughable. They played Duke is an absolute down pour, Florida goalie played outrageous 16 saves, and BC gave up 21 with that defense. SBU was as close in the second half as anyone as was JMU who both play zones. The team with the best chance at beating them is most likely NW who will try to make it a shoot out ,if they play the Scane -Trenchard match up will be fun to watch.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There is one formula to beating UNC.

You have to play Man to Man defense. The teams that have done this have had good success. Duke, UF and BC were close games at half. Don’t get me wrong the this final score were different stories but the over strategy of Man to Man hard pressure on ball worked especially for UF. KH and JO have a unique chemistry on field. So you at least need to take one away. They don’t beat you 1v1 very often to be honest. It is quick off ball cutting and passing. Secondly the goalie has to have a big game-15 to 18 saves. Lastly, you need UNC to have soon offensive sets where they simply don’t take care of the ball, and have unforced turnovers .

But as mentioned above you have to score 10-12 goals to win. That has been nearly impossible against UNC. If there is a little break down on the 1v1 D TM has been excellent all year at making that save. Otherwise most shots are being highly contested. UNC doesn’t slide fast. They trust the one v one match up which last year in NW almost cost them the game.

As you can see it takes almost a perfect effort by an opponent as nothing can breakdown, and a lot has to go right for the team game plan.

But you won’t win playing a zone against them

Get over yourself. Your man to man must play nonsense is laughable. They played Duke is an absolute down pour, Florida goalie played outrageous 16 saves, and BC gave up 21 with that defense. SBU was as close in the second half as anyone as was JMU who both play zones. The team with the best chance at beating them is most likely NW who will try to make it a shoot out ,if they play the Scane -Trenchard match up will be fun to watch.

Don’t think unc will use Trenchard on Scane...
in most cases I don’t think size is a factor however Scane is a “Power” player. I’m guessing Wakefield.

If you look at SOS how does NU / Scane match up then? they aren't playing anyone in top 5-6. SOS will be thrown out this year due to Covid-Conference only play.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If you look at SOS how does NU / Scane match up then? they aren't playing anyone in top 5-6. SOS will be thrown out this year due to Covid-Conference only play.

Lets not discount the Big 10, Pretty much every year they have between 3 - 5 Top 20 teams... Not The ACC but please.... That said it will be tough for anyone but a Carolina player if Carolina wins the National Championship. Also, there is a chance that Northwestern plays 3 games vs ACC Teams in the Tournament.

As good as UNC is, they will might have to beat an ACC Team 4 times in order to win it all.... Thats just not easy.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If you look at SOS how does NU / Scane match up then? they aren't playing anyone in top 5-6. SOS will be thrown out this year due to Covid-Conference only play.

Lets not discount the Big 10, Pretty much every year they have between 3 - 5 Top 20 teams... Not The ACC but please.... That said it will be tough for anyone but a Carolina player if Carolina wins the National Championship. Also, there is a chance that Northwestern plays 3 games vs ACC Teams in the Tournament.

As good as UNC is, they will might have to beat an ACC Team 4 times in order to win it all.... Thats just not easy.

Most likely 3 times if it happens which is still not easy and coaching comes into play more each game,

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

No, Virginia Tech has not demonstrated that they are competitive.

But doesn’t Va Tech play in the “most competitive” conference and theoretically play the schedule with the most top 20 teams. Point is your record is your record. Own it. Win your conference and go to NCAA tournament.

The above post simply foolish and silly.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

No, Virginia Tech has not demonstrated that they are competitive.

But doesn’t Va Tech play in the “most competitive” conference and theoretically play the schedule with the most top 20 teams. Point is your record is your record. Own it. Win your conference and go to NCAA tournament.

The above post simply foolish and silly.

Is this a fact based statement or just your opinion. Please provide the basis for your opinion.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

No, Virginia Tech has not demonstrated that they are competitive.

But doesn’t Va Tech play in the “most competitive” conference and theoretically play the schedule with the most top 20 teams. Point is your record is your record. Own it. Win your conference and go to NCAA tournament.

The above post simply foolish and silly.

Didn't Va Tech lose to Davidson?? Own your record

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

No, Virginia Tech has not demonstrated that they are competitive.

But doesn’t Va Tech play in the “most competitive” conference and theoretically play the schedule with the most top 20 teams. Point is your record is your record. Own it. Win your conference and go to NCAA tournament.

The above post simply foolish and silly.

Is this a fact based statement or just your opinion. Please provide the basis for your opinion.

That question is just as silly as the other post, of course it is his opinion.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

No, Virginia Tech has not demonstrated that they are competitive.

But doesn’t Va Tech play in the “most competitive” conference and theoretically play the schedule with the most top 20 teams. Point is your record is your record. Own it. Win your conference and go to NCAA tournament.

The above post simply foolish and silly.

Didn't Va Tech lose to Davidson?? Own your record

Quick comparison of two teams with identical records in 2019 (Jacksonville: 17 - 4 and North Carolina: 17 - 4). According to your logic these teams should be considered equal and have the same "Ranking". Maybe if the competed against each other the game would have resulted in a tie.

Jacksonville Record: 17 - 4

Ranking: Not ranked at the end of the season.

Jacksonville played 3 Top 20 Teams (#11, #13, #17) Lost to all three Top 20 Teams.

Jacksonville played 0 Top 10 Teams.

Jacksonville had 0 Top 20 wins.

Jacksonville had 1 loss to an unranked team.

North Carolina Record: 17 - 4

Ranking: # 3

UNC played 12 Top 20 Teams (#1, #2 three times, #4, #5, #7 twice, #9, #13 twice, #15) 8 - 4 vs Top 20.

9 opponents were Top 10.

6 opponents were Top 5

UNC had 8 wins Vs Top 20 Teams.

5 Wins vs Top 10 Teams.

3 Wins vs Top 5 Teams.

1 Win vs the # 2 Team.

Lost to # 1 National Champion by 1 goal in OT.

BTW... UNC played #21 twice, #24, and #25 twice....

17 of 21 games were played Vs Top 25 Teams.

Sorry, In women's Division I Lacrosse a teams record means very little when comparing or evaluating teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting but confusing. Can’t use a teams record to do rankings. So since teams are mostly playing within conference so we should just try to determine which conferences are best and anoint the teams within those conferences as the best and therefore worthy of NCAA bids. Sorry, I am leaning towards Big 10 not being that good. ACC... yes very good conference so Va Tech is in??

No, Virginia Tech has not demonstrated that they are competitive.

But doesn’t Va Tech play in the “most competitive” conference and theoretically play the schedule with the most top 20 teams. Point is your record is your record. Own it. Win your conference and go to NCAA tournament.

The above post simply foolish and silly.

Didn't Va Tech lose to Davidson?? Own your record

Quick comparison of two teams with identical records in 2019 (Jacksonville: 17 - 4 and North Carolina: 17 - 4). According to your logic these teams should be considered equal and have the same "Ranking". Maybe if the competed against each other the game would have resulted in a tie.

Jacksonville Record: 17 - 4

Ranking: Not ranked at the end of the season.

Jacksonville played 3 Top 20 Teams (#11, #13, #17) Lost to all three Top 20 Teams.

Jacksonville played 0 Top 10 Teams.

Jacksonville had 0 Top 20 wins.

Jacksonville had 1 loss to an unranked team.

North Carolina Record: 17 - 4

Ranking: # 3

UNC played 12 Top 20 Teams (#1, #2 three times, #4, #5, #7 twice, #9, #13 twice, #15) 8 - 4 vs Top 20.

9 opponents were Top 10.

6 opponents were Top 5

UNC had 8 wins Vs Top 20 Teams.

5 Wins vs Top 10 Teams.

3 Wins vs Top 5 Teams.

1 Win vs the # 2 Team.

Lost to # 1 National Champion by 1 goal in OT.

BTW... UNC played #21 twice, #24, and #25 twice....

17 of 21 games were played Vs Top 25 Teams.

Sorry, In women's Division I Lacrosse a teams record means very little when comparing or evaluating teams.

We are not talking about UNC or Jacksonville, we are talking about this years Va Tech team. They are 3-7. Those wins were against Liberty, Longwood and Radford. They lost to some very good teams but lost to unranked Davidson. Hopefully they can win one more or perhaps two more but it will be difficult. Beating Louisville would have been a good win and perhaps the only shot at an ACC win, but they lost. Please do not tell me their record means very little. Their record shouts out mediocre to me

[/quote]

Quick comparison of two teams with identical records in 2019 (Jacksonville: 17 - 4 and North Carolina: 17 - 4). According to your logic these teams should be considered equal and have the same "Ranking". Maybe if the competed against each other the game would have resulted in a tie.

Jacksonville Record: 17 - 4

Ranking: Not ranked at the end of the season.

Jacksonville played 3 Top 20 Teams (#11, #13, #17) Lost to all three Top 20 Teams.

Jacksonville played 0 Top 10 Teams.

Jacksonville had 0 Top 20 wins.

Jacksonville had 1 loss to an unranked team.

North Carolina Record: 17 - 4

Ranking: # 3

UNC played 12 Top 20 Teams (#1, #2 three times, #4, #5, #7 twice, #9, #13 twice, #15) 8 - 4 vs Top 20.

9 opponents were Top 10.

6 opponents were Top 5

UNC had 8 wins Vs Top 20 Teams.

5 Wins vs Top 10 Teams.

3 Wins vs Top 5 Teams.

1 Win vs the # 2 Team.

Lost to # 1 National Champion by 1 goal in OT.

BTW... UNC played #21 twice, #24, and #25 twice....

17 of 21 games were played Vs Top 25 Teams.

Sorry, In women's Division I Lacrosse a teams record means very little when comparing or evaluating teams.[/quote]

We are not talking about UNC or Jacksonville, we are talking about this years Va Tech team. They are 3-7. Those wins were against Liberty, Longwood and Radford. They lost to some very good teams but lost to unranked Davidson. Hopefully they can win one more or perhaps two more but it will be difficult. Beating Louisville would have been a good win and perhaps the only shot at an ACC win, but they lost. Please do not tell me their record means very little. Their record shouts out mediocre to me[/quote]

I will jump in on this one. I believe the overall discussion was about the premise that a teams record is not necessarily indicative of where a team should be ranked.

Your argument does not support the contention that a teams record (alone) accurately reflects how strong a particular team is. Your argument is actually based on the fact that Virginia Tech lost to an unranked Davidson Team and that they do not have any quality wins vs Top 20 teams. It is not solely based on Virginia Techs Record.

Simply put, a teams record is not a very good barometer to use when comparing teams.

As the above comparison illustrates, the "own your record" phrase is ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[/quote]

Quick comparison of two teams with identical records in 2019 (Jacksonville: 17 - 4 and North Carolina: 17 - 4). According to your logic these teams should be considered equal and have the same "Ranking". Maybe if the competed against each other the game would have resulted in a tie.

Jacksonville Record: 17 - 4

Ranking: Not ranked at the end of the season.

Jacksonville played 3 Top 20 Teams (#11, #13, #17) Lost to all three Top 20 Teams.

Jacksonville played 0 Top 10 Teams.

Jacksonville had 0 Top 20 wins.

Jacksonville had 1 loss to an unranked team.

North Carolina Record: 17 - 4

Ranking: # 3

UNC played 12 Top 20 Teams (#1, #2 three times, #4, #5, #7 twice, #9, #13 twice, #15) 8 - 4 vs Top 20.

9 opponents were Top 10.

6 opponents were Top 5

UNC had 8 wins Vs Top 20 Teams.

5 Wins vs Top 10 Teams.

3 Wins vs Top 5 Teams.

1 Win vs the # 2 Team.

Lost to # 1 National Champion by 1 goal in OT.

BTW... UNC played #21 twice, #24, and #25 twice....

17 of 21 games were played Vs Top 25 Teams.

Sorry, In women's Division I Lacrosse a teams record means very little when comparing or evaluating teams.

We are not talking about UNC or Jacksonville, we are talking about this years Va Tech team. They are 3-7. Those wins were against Liberty, Longwood and Radford. They lost to some very good teams but lost to unranked Davidson. Hopefully they can win one more or perhaps two more but it will be difficult. Beating Louisville would have been a good win and perhaps the only shot at an ACC win, but they lost. Please do not tell me their record means very little. Their record shouts out mediocre to me[/quote]

I will jump in on this one. I believe the overall discussion was about the premise that a teams record is not necessarily indicative of where a team should be ranked.

Your argument does not support the contention that a teams record (alone) accurately reflects how strong a particular team is. Your argument is actually based on the fact that Virginia Tech lost to an unranked Davidson Team and that they do not have any quality wins vs Top 20 teams. It is not solely based on Virginia Techs Record.

Simply put, a teams record is not a very good barometer to use when comparing teams.

As the above comparison illustrates, the "own your record" phrase is ridiculous.[/quote]

So Va Tech is last in the competitive ACC. They just played the other cellar dweller Louisville and lost, they lost to the team above that in Duke and the team above that in Virginia. So they are in last place. They still have one more game each against both Duke and Virginia. A win against one of those would help them get some credibility.

I understand where you are coming from in regards to an overal record not meaning as much. Duke is 6-5 with no losses outside of the ACC. That is why they are ranked. Va Tech lost to Davidson and Jacksonville. Jacksonville is ranked. At the time Va Tech was ranked but obviously no more. Beating Florida was a nice win for Jacksonville...but let's be honest, if Jacksonville was in the ACC they would probably only have 1 win. (Va Tech)

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Quick comparison of two teams with identical records in 2019 (Jacksonville: 17 - 4 and North Carolina: 17 - 4). According to your logic these teams should be considered equal and have the same "Ranking". Maybe if the competed against each other the game would have resulted in a tie.

Jacksonville Record: 17 - 4

Ranking: Not ranked at the end of the season.

Jacksonville played 3 Top 20 Teams (#11, #13, #17) Lost to all three Top 20 Teams.

Jacksonville played 0 Top 10 Teams.

Jacksonville had 0 Top 20 wins.

Jacksonville had 1 loss to an unranked team.

North Carolina Record: 17 - 4

Ranking: # 3

UNC played 12 Top 20 Teams (#1, #2 three times, #4, #5, #7 twice, #9, #13 twice, #15) 8 - 4 vs Top 20.

9 opponents were Top 10.

6 opponents were Top 5

UNC had 8 wins Vs Top 20 Teams.

5 Wins vs Top 10 Teams.

3 Wins vs Top 5 Teams.

1 Win vs the # 2 Team.

Lost to # 1 National Champion by 1 goal in OT.

BTW... UNC played #21 twice, #24, and #25 twice....

17 of 21 games were played Vs Top 25 Teams.

Sorry, In women's Division I Lacrosse a teams record means very little when comparing or evaluating teams.

We are not talking about UNC or Jacksonville, we are talking about this years Va Tech team. They are 3-7. Those wins were against Liberty, Longwood and Radford. They lost to some very good teams but lost to unranked Davidson. Hopefully they can win one more or perhaps two more but it will be difficult. Beating Louisville would have been a good win and perhaps the only shot at an ACC win, but they lost. Please do not tell me their record means very little. Their record shouts out mediocre to me[/quote]

I will jump in on this one. I believe the overall discussion was about the premise that a teams record is not necessarily indicative of where a team should be ranked.

Your argument does not support the contention that a teams record (alone) accurately reflects how strong a particular team is. Your argument is actually based on the fact that Virginia Tech lost to an unranked Davidson Team and that they do not have any quality wins vs Top 20 teams. It is not solely based on Virginia Techs Record.

Simply put, a teams record is not a very good barometer to use when comparing teams.

As the above comparison illustrates, the "own your record" phrase is ridiculous.[/quote]

So Va Tech is last in the competitive ACC. They just played the other cellar dweller Louisville and lost, they lost to the team above that in Duke and the team above that in Virginia. So they are in last place. They still have one more game each against both Duke and Virginia. A win against one of those would help them get some credibility.

I understand where you are coming from in regards to an overal record not meaning as much. Duke is 6-5 with no losses outside of the ACC. That is why they are ranked. Va Tech lost to Davidson and Jacksonville. Jacksonville is ranked. At the time Va Tech was ranked but obviously no more. Beating Florida was a nice win for Jacksonville...but let's be honest, if Jacksonville was in the ACC they would probably only have 1 win. (Va Tech)[/quote]

Not sure what your hang up is with Virginia Tech. I do not recall anyone saying that they should be ranked. The entire point was that a in women's lacrosse you can not use a teams record to compare or rank teams you must look at who they play. I believe the discussion started because The Big 10 is only playing in-conference.

So you do not need to have at least a .500 record to get an at large bid to the tournament. Seems like they will have their work cut out for them especially with the big ten. Not playing out of conference really gives us no idea how good these big ten teams are. Difficult to see how they would stack up against the lower ranked ACC teams etc.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So you do not need to have at least a .500 record to get an at large bid to the tournament. Seems like they will have their work cut out for them especially with the big ten. Not playing out of conference really gives us no idea how good these big ten teams are. Difficult to see how they would stack up against the lower ranked ACC teams etc.

Yeah, The Big 10 is really a weak conference. Just curious when you say lower acc teams are you referring to everyone except UNC?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So you do not need to have at least a .500 record to get an at large bid to the tournament. Seems like they will have their work cut out for them especially with the big ten. Not playing out of conference really gives us no idea how good these big ten teams are. Difficult to see how they would stack up against the lower ranked ACC teams etc.

Recent History...

2016 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC- UNC, Syracuse

UNC - National Champion

2017 - Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC - BC

Maryland - National Champion

2018 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland
ACC - BC, UNC

JMU - National Championship

2019 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Northwestern
ACC - BC, UNC

Maryland - National Champion

So let me get this straight, The Big 10 is only playing in conference so we will look at their records and then try to compare Big 10 teams to the rest of Division 1 women's teams? Since some of the teams have sub par records we must assume that they are not very good. OK, I get it.

If I understand correctly, we are to assume that the two strongest programs in the history of the sport suddenly fell apart and are no longer competitive. I guess Hopkins and Penn State are not competitive, Forget about Michigan who was ranked 11th at the end of the 2019 eason (the last full season of play). OSU and Rutgers most certainly couldn't win a non-conference game....

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So you do not need to have at least a .500 record to get an at large bid to the tournament. Seems like they will have their work cut out for them especially with the big ten. Not playing out of conference really gives us no idea how good these big ten teams are. Difficult to see how they would stack up against the lower ranked ACC teams etc.

Recent History...

2016 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC- UNC, Syracuse

UNC - National Champion

2017 - Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC - BC

Maryland - National Champion

2018 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland
ACC - BC, UNC

JMU - National Championship

2019 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Northwestern
ACC - BC, UNC

Maryland - National Champion

So let me get this straight, The Big 10 is only playing in conference so we will look at their records and then try to compare Big 10 teams to the rest of Division 1 women's teams? Since some of the teams have sub par records we must assume that they are not very good. OK, I get it.

If I understand correctly, we are to assume that the two strongest programs in the history of the sport suddenly fell apart and are no longer competitive. I guess Hopkins and Penn State are not competitive, Forget about Michigan who was ranked 11th at the end of the 2019 eason (the last full season of play). OSU and Rutgers most certainly couldn't win a non-conference game....

Wow sensitive Sally. I used the lower ranked ACC as they seem to have similar records to many of the big 10 teams. You obviously think every big ten team should make the tournament why not just say that instead of your sarcastic nonsense. If you watch Maryland some would say they have fallen apart compared to the old days ,they seem worse than the Maryland team that lost 19-6 to UNC. Not sure how Maryland would do this year in the ACC will be interesting to see who the committee selects.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So you do not need to have at least a .500 record to get an at large bid to the tournament. Seems like they will have their work cut out for them especially with the big ten. Not playing out of conference really gives us no idea how good these big ten teams are. Difficult to see how they would stack up against the lower ranked ACC teams etc.

Recent History...

2016 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC- UNC, Syracuse

UNC - National Champion

2017 - Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC - BC

Maryland - National Champion

2018 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland
ACC - BC, UNC

JMU - National Championship

2019 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Northwestern
ACC - BC, UNC

Maryland - National Champion

So let me get this straight, The Big 10 is only playing in conference so we will look at their records and then try to compare Big 10 teams to the rest of Division 1 women's teams? Since some of the teams have sub par records we must assume that they are not very good. OK, I get it.

If I understand correctly, we are to assume that the two strongest programs in the history of the sport suddenly fell apart and are no longer competitive. I guess Hopkins and Penn State are not competitive, Forget about Michigan who was ranked 11th at the end of the 2019 eason (the last full season of play). OSU and Rutgers most certainly couldn't win a non-conference game....

Wow sensitive Sally. I used the lower ranked ACC as they seem to have similar records to many of the big 10 teams. You obviously think every big ten team should make the tournament why not just say that instead of your sarcastic nonsense. If you watch Maryland some would say they have fallen apart compared to the old days ,they seem worse than the Maryland team that lost 19-6 to UNC. Not sure how Maryland would do this year in the ACC will be interesting to see who the committee selects.

Both are excellent conferences. Challenging to judge / rank teams this year. No doubt Maryland is down from their peak but still a competitive team. I don't know if every Big Ten team should make the tournament but they all look pretty good.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So you do not need to have at least a .500 record to get an at large bid to the tournament. Seems like they will have their work cut out for them especially with the big ten. Not playing out of conference really gives us no idea how good these big ten teams are. Difficult to see how they would stack up against the lower ranked ACC teams etc.

Is that true regarding .500 record?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So you do not need to have at least a .500 record to get an at large bid to the tournament. Seems like they will have their work cut out for them especially with the big ten. Not playing out of conference really gives us no idea how good these big ten teams are. Difficult to see how they would stack up against the lower ranked ACC teams etc.

Recent History...

2016 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC- UNC, Syracuse

UNC - National Champion

2017 - Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC - BC

Maryland - National Champion

2018 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland
ACC - BC, UNC

JMU - National Championship

2019 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Northwestern
ACC - BC, UNC

Maryland - National Champion

So let me get this straight, The Big 10 is only playing in conference so we will look at their records and then try to compare Big 10 teams to the rest of Division 1 women's teams? Since some of the teams have sub par records we must assume that they are not very good. OK, I get it.

If I understand correctly, we are to assume that the two strongest programs in the history of the sport suddenly fell apart and are no longer competitive. I guess Hopkins and Penn State are not competitive, Forget about Michigan who was ranked 11th at the end of the 2019 eason (the last full season of play). OSU and Rutgers most certainly couldn't win a non-conference game....

Wow sensitive Sally. I used the lower ranked ACC as they seem to have similar records to many of the big 10 teams. You obviously think every big ten team should make the tournament why not just say that instead of your sarcastic nonsense. If you watch Maryland some would say they have fallen apart compared to the old days ,they seem worse than the Maryland team that lost 19-6 to UNC. Not sure how Maryland would do this year in the ACC will be interesting to see who the committee selects.

Both are excellent conferences. Challenging to judge / rank teams this year. No doubt Maryland is down from their peak but still a competitive team. I don't know if every Big Ten team should make the tournament but they all look pretty good.

Big 10 all look pretty good. Cmon man.

NU 10-0 208 Goals for. 103 goals against
Maryland 6-3. 112 GF 116 GA
Hopkins 3-4. 70 GF. 87 GA
Michigan 3-4. 82 GF. 86 GA
PSU. 3-6. 114 GF. 128 GA
Rutgers 3-6. 95 GF. 129 GA
OSU 3-8. 114 GF. 146 GA

How many pages devoted to how good the Big 10 is. Max to get in NCAA should be top 2. Can we stop with how tough conference is. Maybe a little defense would help these teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So you do not need to have at least a .500 record to get an at large bid to the tournament. Seems like they will have their work cut out for them especially with the big ten. Not playing out of conference really gives us no idea how good these big ten teams are. Difficult to see how they would stack up against the lower ranked ACC teams etc.

Recent History...

2016 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC- UNC, Syracuse

UNC - National Champion

2017 - Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC - BC

Maryland - National Champion

2018 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland
ACC - BC, UNC

JMU - National Championship

2019 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Northwestern
ACC - BC, UNC

Maryland - National Champion

So let me get this straight, The Big 10 is only playing in conference so we will look at their records and then try to compare Big 10 teams to the rest of Division 1 women's teams? Since some of the teams have sub par records we must assume that they are not very good. OK, I get it.

If I understand correctly, we are to assume that the two strongest programs in the history of the sport suddenly fell apart and are no longer competitive. I guess Hopkins and Penn State are not competitive, Forget about Michigan who was ranked 11th at the end of the 2019 eason (the last full season of play). OSU and Rutgers most certainly couldn't win a non-conference game....

Wow sensitive Sally. I used the lower ranked ACC as they seem to have similar records to many of the big 10 teams. You obviously think every big ten team should make the tournament why not just say that instead of your sarcastic nonsense. If you watch Maryland some would say they have fallen apart compared to the old days ,they seem worse than the Maryland team that lost 19-6 to UNC. Not sure how Maryland would do this year in the ACC will be interesting to see who the committee selects.

Both are excellent conferences. Challenging to judge / rank teams this year. No doubt Maryland is down from their peak but still a competitive team. I don't know if every Big Ten team should make the tournament but they all look pretty good.

Big 10 all look pretty good. Cmon man.

NU 10-0 208 Goals for. 103 goals against
Maryland 6-3. 112 GF 116 GA
Hopkins 3-4. 70 GF. 87 GA
Michigan 3-4. 82 GF. 86 GA
PSU. 3-6. 114 GF. 128 GA
Rutgers 3-6. 95 GF. 129 GA
OSU 3-8. 114 GF. 146 GA

How many pages devoted to how good the Big 10 is. Max to get in NCAA should be top 2. Can we stop with how tough conference is. Maybe a little defense would help these teams.

Considering the fact that they are only playing among themselves stats and records have no relevance when trying to compare them to teams outside their conference.

Strange year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So you do not need to have at least a .500 record to get an at large bid to the tournament. Seems like they will have their work cut out for them especially with the big ten. Not playing out of conference really gives us no idea how good these big ten teams are. Difficult to see how they would stack up against the lower ranked ACC teams etc.

Is that true regarding .500 record?

Normal years, yes. This year teams do not need a .500 or better record.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So you do not need to have at least a .500 record to get an at large bid to the tournament. Seems like they will have their work cut out for them especially with the big ten. Not playing out of conference really gives us no idea how good these big ten teams are. Difficult to see how they would stack up against the lower ranked ACC teams etc.

Recent History...

2016 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC- UNC, Syracuse

UNC - National Champion

2017 - Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC - BC

Maryland - National Champion

2018 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland
ACC - BC, UNC

JMU - National Championship

2019 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Northwestern
ACC - BC, UNC

Maryland - National Champion

So let me get this straight, The Big 10 is only playing in conference so we will look at their records and then try to compare Big 10 teams to the rest of Division 1 women's teams? Since some of the teams have sub par records we must assume that they are not very good. OK, I get it.

If I understand correctly, we are to assume that the two strongest programs in the history of the sport suddenly fell apart and are no longer competitive. I guess Hopkins and Penn State are not competitive, Forget about Michigan who was ranked 11th at the end of the 2019 eason (the last full season of play). OSU and Rutgers most certainly couldn't win a non-conference game....

Wow sensitive Sally. I used the lower ranked ACC as they seem to have similar records to many of the big 10 teams. You obviously think every big ten team should make the tournament why not just say that instead of your sarcastic nonsense. If you watch Maryland some would say they have fallen apart compared to the old days ,they seem worse than the Maryland team that lost 19-6 to UNC. Not sure how Maryland would do this year in the ACC will be interesting to see who the committee selects.

Both are excellent conferences. Challenging to judge / rank teams this year. No doubt Maryland is down from their peak but still a competitive team. I don't know if every Big Ten team should make the tournament but they all look pretty good.

Big 10 all look pretty good. Cmon man.

NU 10-0 208 Goals for. 103 goals against
Maryland 6-3. 112 GF 116 GA
Hopkins 3-4. 70 GF. 87 GA
Michigan 3-4. 82 GF. 86 GA
PSU. 3-6. 114 GF. 128 GA
Rutgers 3-6. 95 GF. 129 GA
OSU 3-8. 114 GF. 146 GA

How many pages devoted to how good the Big 10 is. Max to get in NCAA should be top 2. Can we stop with how tough conference is. Maybe a little defense would help these teams.

We all know The ACC is the deepest but I don’t think there is any other conference that is tougher than The Big Ten.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So you do not need to have at least a .500 record to get an at large bid to the tournament. Seems like they will have their work cut out for them especially with the big ten. Not playing out of conference really gives us no idea how good these big ten teams are. Difficult to see how they would stack up against the lower ranked ACC teams etc.

Recent History...

2016 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC- UNC, Syracuse

UNC - National Champion

2017 - Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC - BC

Maryland - National Champion

2018 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland
ACC - BC, UNC

JMU - National Championship

2019 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Northwestern
ACC - BC, UNC

Maryland - National Champion

So let me get this straight, The Big 10 is only playing in conference so we will look at their records and then try to compare Big 10 teams to the rest of Division 1 women's teams? Since some of the teams have sub par records we must assume that they are not very good. OK, I get it.

If I understand correctly, we are to assume that the two strongest programs in the history of the sport suddenly fell apart and are no longer competitive. I guess Hopkins and Penn State are not competitive, Forget about Michigan who was ranked 11th at the end of the 2019 eason (the last full season of play). OSU and Rutgers most certainly couldn't win a non-conference game....

Wow sensitive Sally. I used the lower ranked ACC as they seem to have similar records to many of the big 10 teams. You obviously think every big ten team should make the tournament why not just say that instead of your sarcastic nonsense. If you watch Maryland some would say they have fallen apart compared to the old days ,they seem worse than the Maryland team that lost 19-6 to UNC. Not sure how Maryland would do this year in the ACC will be interesting to see who the committee selects.

Both are excellent conferences. Challenging to judge / rank teams this year. No doubt Maryland is down from their peak but still a competitive team. I don't know if every Big Ten team should make the tournament but they all look pretty good.

Big 10 all look pretty good. Cmon man.

NU 10-0 208 Goals for. 103 goals against
Maryland 6-3. 112 GF 116 GA
Hopkins 3-4. 70 GF. 87 GA
Michigan 3-4. 82 GF. 86 GA
PSU. 3-6. 114 GF. 128 GA
Rutgers 3-6. 95 GF. 129 GA
OSU 3-8. 114 GF. 146 GA

How many pages devoted to how good the Big 10 is. Max to get in NCAA should be top 2. Can we stop with how tough conference is. Maybe a little defense would help these teams.

We all know The ACC is the deepest but I don’t think there is any other conference that is tougher than The Big Ten.

What does that even mean. Stats seem to show Big 10 is over rated except by a select few here that want to push that it is toughest conference. If your opinion is “its toughest” at least try to attach some type of facts/stats to support your position.

Trying to say.... outside of the ACC The Big 10 is the toughest conference.

Terms just announced that they will have at least two seniors come back for a 5th year in 2022..
What will this do the incoming recruits class? The 23’s?
Do you think CR tells certain seniors that she doesn’t have room for them as 5th yr?

[quote=Anonymous]Terms just announced that they will have at least two seniors come back for a 5th year in 2022..
What will this do the incoming recruits class? The 23’s?
Do you think CR tells certain seniors that she doesn’t have room for them as 5th yr?[/quote
*Terps

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Terms just announced that they will have at least two seniors come back for a 5th year in 2022..
What will this do the incoming recruits class? The 23’s?
Do you think CR tells certain seniors that she doesn’t have room for them as 5th yr?

I assume you mean the Terps and Cathy Reese.. yesi expect the coaches will be forthright with all returning players.. either they will be continuing their scholarships or they won’t be.. I’m sure a 5th year would be welcomed back to the team but they may have to pay the full tuition to do so. Of course if the player in question is a stud.. the money will remain

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I do agree lots of talented players at UNC. But I think one big issue that will play a major role is loss of assistant coach KD. They had a very close game with NW, and were just going to tough part of schedule when season cancelled LY. Time will tell and what team put the work in during break will show in the big games.

Should be a fun season. Let’s hope it happens with few delays.

I agree 100 % ,I don’t believe UNC has ever won a national championship with KD not running the offense . I would say they are still the most talented team in the country as they essentially bring their whole team back and will be better in the midfield ( which was their weak spot last year) with the addition of Miller and the return of Hillman but coaching matters . Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND . Look out for Loyola as they are one of those teams that are well coached and tend to fly under the radar . Which of the top teams will get a lift from their freshman .

Why would you state: "Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND"? UNC's record vs Notre Dame is 8 - 1 and although UNC's record vs Northwestern is 11 - 11 UNC has won 9 of the last 10 games vs Northwestern. Not a lot of struggling going on vs ND and NU...

Well I guess they do struggle when they go out to the Midwest

What happened to Maryland? They took some beat down from Penn State today!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What happened to Maryland? They took some beat down from Penn State today!

Last year Maryland fell off the cliff. This year the anvil landed on their head.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I do agree lots of talented players at UNC. But I think one big issue that will play a major role is loss of assistant coach KD. They had a very close game with NW, and were just going to tough part of schedule when season cancelled LY. Time will tell and what team put the work in during break will show in the big games.

Should be a fun season. Let’s hope it happens with few delays.

I agree 100 % ,I don’t believe UNC has ever won a national championship with KD not running the offense . I would say they are still the most talented team in the country as they essentially bring their whole team back and will be better in the midfield ( which was their weak spot last year) with the addition of Miller and the return of Hillman but coaching matters . Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND . Look out for Loyola as they are one of those teams that are well coached and tend to fly under the radar . Which of the top teams will get a lift from their freshman .

Why would you state: "Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND"? UNC's record vs Notre Dame is 8 - 1 and although UNC's record vs Northwestern is 11 - 11 UNC has won 9 of the last 10 games vs Northwestern. Not a lot of struggling going on vs ND and NU...

Well I guess they do struggle when they go out to the Midwest

Oh stop, even a broken clock is ...., no vested interest but this year ND is not even in the same class as UNC. If they play 10 games they blow them out in 8 and win all 10.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I do agree lots of talented players at UNC. But I think one big issue that will play a major role is loss of assistant coach KD. They had a very close game with NW, and were just going to tough part of schedule when season cancelled LY. Time will tell and what team put the work in during break will show in the big games.

Should be a fun season. Let’s hope it happens with few delays.

I agree 100 % ,I don’t believe UNC has ever won a national championship with KD not running the offense . I would say they are still the most talented team in the country as they essentially bring their whole team back and will be better in the midfield ( which was their weak spot last year) with the addition of Miller and the return of Hillman but coaching matters . Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND . Look out for Loyola as they are one of those teams that are well coached and tend to fly under the radar . Which of the top teams will get a lift from their freshman .

Why would you state: "Look for them to struggle when they go out to ND as for some reason they seem to struggle with the trips to NW and ND"? UNC's record vs Notre Dame is 8 - 1 and although UNC's record vs Northwestern is 11 - 11 UNC has won 9 of the last 10 games vs Northwestern. Not a lot of struggling going on vs ND and NU...

Well I guess they do struggle when they go out to the Midwest

Call it struggle but at the end of the day it’s a win... now it’s 9 -1 vs Notre Dame... too bad The Big 10 not playing ... would love to watch NU vs UNC...

Finally had chance to watch replay of game last night. The weather looked horrendous. ND played a very good game against UNC at both ends of field. However the opposite wasn’t true. I know UNC won draw controls but that was quickly equalized by ND goalie play especially in first half. Also UNC made soon costly errors in transition between the 30s that had nothing to do with ND pressure. Just sloppy play. Which in others game resulted in goals for them. It wasn’t a few turnovers but many by UNC-also in there offensive plays, just missing cutters with passes and dropping the balls whicj resulted in turnovers.

That game easily could have been a loss for UNC, but playing not your best(across the board) and winning is a good sign for them. However they better not play like that many more times in Upcoming tourneys. Less room for errors moving forward.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What happened to Maryland? They took some beat down from Penn State today!

Last year Maryland fell off the cliff. This year the anvil landed on their head.

Well, at least the jealousy is consistent on here... It really doesn't matter if people are carrying on about Under Armour Tryouts or selections, Inside Lacrosse HS player rankings, All-American Selections or College Players and Teams... There are always foolish individuals waiting for someone to fall... People with this mentality must really have a sad life. What happened? Did Maryland not recruit your daughter? Has Maryland beaten your daughters' team too many times? Or can you just not stand to see people strive for excellence and have success?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What happened to Maryland? They took some beat down from Penn State today!

Last year Maryland fell off the cliff. This year the anvil landed on their head.

Well, at least the jealousy is consistent on here... It really doesn't matter if people are carrying on about Under Armour Tryouts or selections, Inside Lacrosse HS player rankings, All-American Selections or College Players and Teams... There are always foolish individuals waiting for someone to fall... People with this mentality must really have a sad life. What happened? Did Maryland not recruit your daughter? Has Maryland beaten your daughters' team too many times? Or can you just not stand to see people strive for excellence and have success?

Don’t be so bitter. You spent all your money sending your daughter to Maryland for the championship culture. Unfortunately MD is not striving for excellence or success this year. Has nothing to do with UA or IL. Or maybe it does...overrated recruits not producing.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What happened to Maryland? They took some beat down from Penn State today!

Last year Maryland fell off the cliff. This year the anvil landed on their head.

Well, at least the jealousy is consistent on here... It really doesn't matter if people are carrying on about Under Armour Tryouts or selections, Inside Lacrosse HS player rankings, All-American Selections or College Players and Teams... There are always foolish individuals waiting for someone to fall... People with this mentality must really have a sad life. What happened? Did Maryland not recruit your daughter? Has Maryland beaten your daughters' team too many times? Or can you just not stand to see people strive for excellence and have success?

Don’t be so bitter. You spent all your money sending your daughter to Maryland for the championship culture. Unfortunately MD is not striving for excellence or success this year. Has nothing to do with UA or IL. Or maybe it does...overrated recruits not producing.

Please, not bitter at all. Really, they are "not striving for excellence or success or excellence". Spoken like a non athlete as well as someone who lives in mediocray. Successful Programs, Teams, Athletes and people have ups and downs but they never stop striving for excellence. Others, wallow around waiting and hoping that the successful fall. What is the saying? Misery loves company... The difference between the successful and the mediocre is the successful don't stay down for long and they do not waste their time trying to tear down others in order to elevate themselves. Terps will be just fine.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What happened to Maryland? They took some beat down from Penn State today!

Last year Maryland fell off the cliff. This year the anvil landed on their head.

Well, at least the jealousy is consistent on here... It really doesn't matter if people are carrying on about Under Armour Tryouts or selections, Inside Lacrosse HS player rankings, All-American Selections or College Players and Teams... There are always foolish individuals waiting for someone to fall... People with this mentality must really have a sad life. What happened? Did Maryland not recruit your daughter? Has Maryland beaten your daughters' team too many times? Or can you just not stand to see people strive for excellence and have success?

Don’t be so bitter. You spent all your money sending your daughter to Maryland for the championship culture. Unfortunately MD is not d. ;; do striving for excellence or success this year. Has nothing to do with UA or IL. Or maybe it does...overrated recruits not producing.

They only brought up UA & IL to make the point that many on here are jealous of the success that others have... your post demonstrates the exact attitude that was being pointed out.

Your comments are typical of the comments made by people with the toxic attitude of individuals who resent the success of others.

As for “overrated recruits not producing” that’s funny... go look at the Top 10 - 15 Programs over the past 5 - 10 years. I am willing to bet they are the same programs that brought in the most “overrated recruits “ i.e. Under Armour All-Americans....
Direct correlation... the programs that consistently bring in the high end recruits are the programs that are consistently Top 10 - 20.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What happened to Maryland? They took some beat down from Penn State today!

Last year Maryland fell off the cliff. This year the anvil landed on their head.

Well, at least the jealousy is consistent on here... It really doesn't matter if people are carrying on about Under Armour Tryouts or selections, Inside Lacrosse HS player rankings, All-American Selections or College Players and Teams... There are always foolish individuals waiting for someone to fall... People with this mentality must really have a sad life. What happened? Did Maryland not recruit your daughter? Has Maryland beaten your daughters' team too many times? Or can you just not stand to see people strive for excellence and have success?

Don’t be so bitter. You spent all your money sending your daughter to Maryland for the championship culture. Unfortunately MD is not striving for excellence or success this year. Has nothing to do with UA or IL. Or maybe it does...overrated recruits not producing.

Don't think it has anything to do with jealousy. MD currently doesn't belong on the pedestal that people put them on. I personally love to see "new" teams in the mix and it not always be about the "same old". IMO

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What happened to Maryland? They took some beat down from Penn State today!

Last year Maryland fell off the cliff. This year the anvil landed on their head.

Well, at least the jealousy is consistent on here... It really doesn't matter if people are carrying on about Under Armour Tryouts or selections, Inside Lacrosse HS player rankings, All-American Selections or College Players and Teams... There are always foolish individuals waiting for someone to fall... People with this mentality must really have a sad life. What happened? Did Maryland not recruit your daughter? Has Maryland beaten your daughters' team too many times? Or can you just not stand to see people strive for excellence and have success?

Don’t be so bitter. You spent all your money sending your daughter to Maryland for the championship culture. Unfortunately MD is not striving for excellence or success this year. Has nothing to do with UA or IL. Or maybe it does...overrated recruits not producing.

Don't think it has anything to do with jealousy. MD currently doesn't belong on the pedestal that people put them on. I personally love to see "new" teams in the mix and it not always be about the "same old". IMO

Maryland put themselves on whatever pedestal they are on... The Terps a by far the most successful program in the history of women's lacrosse. Who are the new teams in the mix? With the exception of the Ivy's not competing it's pretty much the "same old".

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What happened to Maryland? They took some beat down from Penn State today!

Last year Maryland fell off the cliff. This year the anvil landed on their head.

Well, at least the jealousy is consistent on here... It really doesn't matter if people are carrying on about Under Armour Tryouts or selections, Inside Lacrosse HS player rankings, All-American Selections or College Players and Teams... There are always foolish individuals waiting for someone to fall... People with this mentality must really have a sad life. What happened? Did Maryland not recruit your daughter? Has Maryland beaten your daughters' team too many times? Or can you just not stand to see people strive for excellence and have success?

Don’t be so bitter. You spent all your money sending your daughter to Maryland for the championship culture. Unfortunately MD is not striving for excellence or success this year. Has nothing to do with UA or IL. Or maybe it does...overrated recruits not producing.

Don't think it has anything to do with jealousy. MD currently doesn't belong on the pedestal that people put them on. I personally love to see "new" teams in the mix and it not always be about the "same old". IMO

Maryland put themselves on whatever pedestal they are on... The Terps a by far the most successful program in the history of women's lacrosse. Who are the new teams in the mix? With the exception of the Ivy's not competing it's pretty much the "same old".

Until some new programs start winning the recruiting battle vs the “same old” we are not going to see any “new” teams in the mix.

Just last week on this very website, UNC was put in a class all by themselves, deemed untouchable. If you’re so untouchable and so above all these other mediocre teams how do you only win by 1 against a team with no superstars?? Just curious? Oh and I heard it only rained on the UNC players so maybe you can use that as an excuse.

Spent all of their money sending the kids to MD?
They are middle schools in MIAa/IAMM that cost more. It’s a bargain to be a Terp. I don’t know what the deal is this year with them. Not playing up to snuff.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What happened to Maryland? They took some beat down from Penn State today!

Last year Maryland fell off the cliff. This year the anvil landed on their head.

Well, at least the jealousy is consistent on here... It really doesn't matter if people are carrying on about Under Armour Tryouts or selections, Inside Lacrosse HS player rankings, All-American Selections or College Players and Teams... There are always foolish individuals waiting for someone to fall... People with this mentality must really have a sad life. What happened? Did Maryland not recruit your daughter? Has Maryland beaten your daughters' team too many times? Or can you just not stand to see people strive for excellence and have success?

Don’t be so bitter. You spent all your money sending your daughter to Maryland for the championship culture. Unfortunately MD is not striving for excellence or success this year. Has nothing to do with UA or IL. Or maybe it does...overrated recruits not producing.

Don't think it has anything to do with jealousy. MD currently doesn't belong on the pedestal that people put them on. I personally love to see "new" teams in the mix and it not always be about the "same old". IMO

Maryland put themselves on whatever pedestal they are on... The Terps a by far the most successful program in the history of women's lacrosse. Who are the new teams in the mix? With the exception of the Ivy's not competing it's pretty much the "same old".

Okay so if all their success is what put them on the pedestal getting mercy ruled multiple times the last few years is what has knocked them off. They should no longer be considered a top 10 team in my opinion. Will they get back to the top, only time will tell but by the looks of them they are heading in the opposite direction.

It’s great to see them smash and then come through when challenged.
Although it’s a bit like watching pro lacrosse- a little boring because everyone’s so awesome and such a well established fool.
We want to see some new kids shine. The hungry ones.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just last week on this very website, UNC was put in a class all by themselves, deemed untouchable. If you’re so untouchable and so above all these other mediocre teams how do you only win by 1 against a team with no superstars?? Just curious? Oh and I heard it only rained on the UNC players so maybe you can use that as an excuse.

Calm down ,just because someone says something silly like a team is in its own class does not mean many people believe them. That said I will still pick UNC as the eventual winner. As far as the weather we get that both teams played in it but it looked miserable and playing conditions can be a great equalizer as can a goalie who plays lights out which that game had both. If they play again in the ACC tournament I will take UNC by a much wider margin.As I have said before the UNC team always struggles at ND .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just last week on this very website, UNC was put in a class all by themselves, deemed untouchable. If you’re so untouchable and so above all these other mediocre teams how do you only win by 1 against a team with no superstars?? Just curious? Oh and I heard it only rained on the UNC players so maybe you can use that as an excuse.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just last week on this very website, UNC was put in a class all by themselves, deemed untouchable. If you’re so untouchable and so above all these other mediocre teams how do you only win by 1 against a team with no superstars?? Just curious? Oh and I heard it only rained on the UNC players so maybe you can use that as an excuse.

Pretty sure Notre Dame was ranked #2 to start the season...
Don’t think anyone has said Notre Dame is mediocre this year...
Notre Dame has been one of the Top 10-15 programs for a long time and they have brought in plenty of superstars over the years.

Okay so if all their success is what put them on the pedestal getting mercy ruled multiple times the last few years is what has knocked them off. They should no longer be considered a top 10 team in my opinion. Will they get back to the top, only time will tell but by the looks of them they are heading in the opposite direction.[/quote]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh boy, this one just might take the cake. Your ignorant, uninformed and untrue statement " getting mercy ruled multiple times the last few years is what has knocked them off" leaves you with zero credibility. They won a National Championship in 2019. Yes, they were Blown out By UNC last year, they also lost to #4 Syracuse and #8 Florida nothing to be ashamed of. This year Northwestern handled them easily. So in the past two years they have been soundly beaten by arguably the two best teams in the country and that is the basis for your opinion?
Get hold of yourself.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It’s great to see them smash and then come through when challenged.
Although it’s a bit like watching pro lacrosse- a little boring because everyone’s so awesome and such a well established fool.
We want to see some new kids shine. The hungry ones.

hmmm

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Okay so if all their success is what put them on the pedestal getting mercy ruled multiple times the last few years is what has knocked them off. They should no longer be considered a top 10 team in my opinion. Will they get back to the top, only time will tell but by the looks of them they are heading in the opposite direction.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh boy, this one just might take the cake. Your ignorant, uninformed and untrue statement " getting mercy ruled multiple times the last few years is what has knocked them off" leaves you with zero credibility. They won a National Championship in 2019. Yes, they were Blown out By UNC last year, they also lost to #4 Syracuse and #8 Florida nothing to be ashamed of. This year Northwestern handled them easily. So in the past two years they have been soundly beaten by arguably the two best teams in the country and that is the basis for your opinion?
Get hold of yourself.[/quote]

Don't be so mad. Your daughter's team stinks this year. Happens sometimes. Maryland barely belongs in top 20 after last weekend's performance.

APRIL 12, 2021 Nike Poll

1 North Carolina
2 Northwestern
3 Syracuse
4 Notre Dame
5 Boston College
6 Stony Brook
7 Virginia
8 Duke
9 Jacksonville
10 Florida
11 Loyola
12 Maryland
13 Richmond
14 Johns Hopkins
15 Drexel
16 Penn State
17 Stanford
18 Michigan
19 Towson
20 Ohio State

ALSO CONSIDERED (ALPHABETICAL ORDER): COLORADO, DENVER, ELON, RUTGERS, TEMPLE, UMASS, VANDERBILT

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So you do not need to have at least a .500 record to get an at large bid to the tournament. Seems like they will have their work cut out for them especially with the big ten. Not playing out of conference really gives us no idea how good these big ten teams are. Difficult to see how they would stack up against the lower ranked ACC teams etc.

Recent History...

2016 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC- UNC, Syracuse

UNC - National Champion

2017 - Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Penn State
ACC - BC

Maryland - National Champion

2018 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland
ACC - BC, UNC

JMU - National Championship

2019 Final Four:

B1G - Maryland, Northwestern
ACC - BC, UNC

Maryland - National Champion

So let me get this straight, The Big 10 is only playing in conference so we will look at their records and then try to compare Big 10 teams to the rest of Division 1 women's teams? Since some of the teams have sub par records we must assume that they are not very good. OK, I get it.

If I understand correctly, we are to assume that the two strongest programs in the history of the sport suddenly fell apart and are no longer competitive. I guess Hopkins and Penn State are not competitive, Forget about Michigan who was ranked 11th at the end of the 2019 eason (the last full season of play). OSU and Rutgers most certainly couldn't win a non-conference game....

Wow sensitive Sally. I used the lower ranked ACC as they seem to have similar records to many of the big 10 teams. You obviously think every big ten team should make the tournament why not just say that instead of your sarcastic nonsense. If you watch Maryland some would say they have fallen apart compared to the old days ,they seem worse than the Maryland team that lost 19-6 to UNC. Not sure how Maryland would do this year in the ACC will be interesting to see who the committee selects.

Both are excellent conferences. Challenging to judge / rank teams this year. No doubt Maryland is down from their peak but still a competitive team. I don't know if every Big Ten team should make the tournament but they all look pretty good.

Big 10 all look pretty good. Cmon man.

NU 10-0 208 Goals for. 103 goals against
Maryland 6-3. 112 GF 116 GA
Hopkins 3-4. 70 GF. 87 GA
Michigan 3-4. 82 GF. 86 GA
PSU. 3-6. 114 GF. 128 GA
Rutgers 3-6. 95 GF. 129 GA
OSU 3-8. 114 GF. 146 GA

How many pages devoted to how good the Big 10 is. Max to get in NCAA should be top 2. Can we stop with how tough conference is. Maybe a little defense would help these teams.

ACC - In Conference Record....

UNC..............6 - 0..... 103 GF.......39 GA
BC.................5 -1........99 GF........74 GA
Syracuse.......5 - 1.......87 GF.........70 GA
Notre Dame...3 - 3.......76 GF.........73 GA
Virginia...........4 - 4.......80 GF.........99 GA
Duke..............3 - 5.......87 GF........98 GA
Louisville........1 - 6.......68 GF........100 GA
Va Tech..........0 - 6.......49 GF........97 GA

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Okay so if all their success is what put them on the pedestal getting mercy ruled multiple times the last few years is what has knocked them off. They should no longer be considered a top 10 team in my opinion. Will they get back to the top, only time will tell but by the looks of them they are heading in the opposite direction.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh boy, this one just might take the cake. Your ignorant, uninformed and untrue statement " getting mercy ruled multiple times the last few years is what has knocked them off" leaves you with zero credibility. They won a National Championship in 2019. Yes, they were Blown out By UNC last year, they also lost to #4 Syracuse and #8 Florida nothing to be ashamed of. This year Northwestern handled them easily. So in the past two years they have been soundly beaten by arguably the two best teams in the country and that is the basis for your opinion?
Get hold of yourself.[/quote]

Talk about uninformed. Between this season and last Maryland has been mercy ruled at least 4 times , one of those times by a team outside the top 15 . You seem to have issues understanding basic facts . Now let’s hear about how they can’t be that bad because a couple years ago they were so good .

And the Ivy schools when they come back into play next year will really mix things up; well a few of them.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Okay so if all their success is what put them on the pedestal getting mercy ruled multiple times the last few years is what has knocked them off. They should no longer be considered a top 10 team in my opinion. Will they get back to the top, only time will tell but by the looks of them they are heading in the opposite direction.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh boy, this one just might take the cake. Your ignorant, uninformed and untrue statement " getting mercy ruled multiple times the last few years is what has knocked them off" leaves you with zero credibility. They won a National Championship in 2019. Yes, they were Blown out By UNC last year, they also lost to #4 Syracuse and #8 Florida nothing to be ashamed of. This year Northwestern handled them easily. So in the past two years they have been soundly beaten by arguably the two best teams in the country and that is the basis for your opinion?
Get hold of yourself.

Talk about uninformed. Between this season and last Maryland has been mercy ruled at least 4 times , one of those times by a team outside the top 15 . You seem to have issues understanding basic facts . Now let’s hear about how they can’t be that bad because a couple years ago they were so good .[/quote]

Here is a Fact, The University of Maryland Women’s Lacrosse Program is the best program in the history of the sport.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And the Ivy schools when they come back into play next year will really mix things up; well a few of them.

Are you responding to a post or talking to yourself?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Okay so if all their success is what put them on the pedestal getting mercy ruled multiple times the last few years is what has knocked them off. They should no longer be considered a top 10 team in my opinion. Will they get back to the top, only time will tell but by the looks of them they are heading in the opposite direction.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh boy, this one just might take the cake. Your ignorant, uninformed and untrue statement " getting mercy ruled multiple times the last few years is what has knocked them off" leaves you with zero credibility. They won a National Championship in 2019. Yes, they were Blown out By UNC last year, they also lost to #4 Syracuse and #8 Florida nothing to be ashamed of. This year Northwestern handled them easily. So in the past two years they have been soundly beaten by arguably the two best teams in the country and that is the basis for your opinion?
Get hold of yourself.

Talk about uninformed. Between this season and last Maryland has been mercy ruled at least 4 times , one of those times by a team outside the top 15 . You seem to have issues understanding basic facts . Now let’s hear about how they can’t be that bad because a couple years ago they were so good .

Here is a Fact, The University of Maryland Women’s Lacrosse Program is the best program in the history of the sport.[/quote]

So we agree MD womens lacrosse is now history. Another fact for you is Yale is the best football program in the history of college football but much like MD womens lacrosse for now they are irrelevant when talking about championships.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Okay so if all their success is what put them on the pedestal getting mercy ruled multiple times the last few years is what has knocked them off. They should no longer be considered a top 10 team in my opinion. Will they get back to the top, only time will tell but by the looks of them they are heading in the opposite direction.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh boy, this one just might take the cake. Your ignorant, uninformed and untrue statement " getting mercy ruled multiple times the last few years is what has knocked them off" leaves you with zero credibility. They won a National Championship in 2019. Yes, they were Blown out By UNC last year, they also lost to #4 Syracuse and #8 Florida nothing to be ashamed of. This year Northwestern handled them easily. So in the past two years they have been soundly beaten by arguably the two best teams in the country and that is the basis for your opinion?
Get hold of yourself.

Talk about uninformed. Between this season and last Maryland has been mercy ruled at least 4 times , one of those times by a team outside the top 15 . You seem to have issues understanding basic facts . Now let’s hear about how they can’t be that bad because a couple years ago they were so good .

Here is a Fact, The University of Maryland Women’s Lacrosse Program is the best program in the history of the sport.

So we agree MD womens lacrosse is now history. Another fact for you is Yale is the best football program in the history of college football but much like MD womens lacrosse for now they are irrelevant when talking about championships.[/quote]

Considering the fact that Maryland won the last National Championship your analogy is irrelevant.

Keep telling yourself that Maryland stinks and they are heading in the wrong direction.

Not sure what drives your animosity, did Maryland not recruit your daughter? Has your daughters team received too many defeats at the hands of the Terrapins? Have you felt inadequate or been embarrassed when your daughters team lost to Maryland? Is it all the Championships that Maryland boasts? Is it all of the Tewaaraton Winners that played for The Terps? Is it all of the All-Americans that have put on the Maryland Uniform?
I just don’t get your the delusion and animosity.

“Considering the fact that Maryland won the last National Championship your analogy is irrelevant.

Keep telling yourself that Maryland stinks and they are heading in the wrong direction.

Not sure what drives your animosity, did Maryland not recruit your daughter? Has your daughters team received too many defeats at the hands of the Terrapins? Have you felt inadequate or been embarrassed when your daughters team lost to Maryland? Is it all the Championships that Maryland boasts? Is it all of the Tewaaraton Winners that played for The Terps? Is it all of the All-Americans that have put on the Maryland Uniform?
I just don’t get your the delusion and animosity.”

No animosity, just pointing out that they stink now . They are completely irrelevant when speaking about a big 10
Or NCAA women’s lacrosse championship this season and for the foreseeable future . Your point that they won a championship not long ago only proves that they are heading in the wrong direction .Is what it is nothing to get so worked up about .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Considering the fact that Maryland won the last National Championship your analogy is irrelevant.

Keep telling yourself that Maryland stinks and they are heading in the wrong direction.

Not sure what drives your animosity, did Maryland not recruit your daughter? Has your daughters team received too many defeats at the hands of the Terrapins? Have you felt inadequate or been embarrassed when your daughters team lost to Maryland? Is it all the Championships that Maryland boasts? Is it all of the Tewaaraton Winners that played for The Terps? Is it all of the All-Americans that have put on the Maryland Uniform?
I just don’t get your the delusion and animosity.”

No animosity, just pointing out that they stink now . They are completely irrelevant when speaking about a big 10
Or NCAA women’s lacrosse championship this season and for the foreseeable future . Your point that they won a championship not long ago only proves that they are heading in the wrong direction .Is what it is nothing to get so worked up about .

Sorry, we definitely read animosity in your posts. I guess in your opinion every team that doesn’t win the National Championship in a given year “stinks”. I guess when Izzy Scane wins the Tewaaraton your logic will tell us that every other player is irrelevant or stinks. If Maryland stinks, then what does that say about the othe 100 + teams that they are better than? I guess in your opinion they must all stink. How about Northwestern? Do they stink? They have not won a championship since 2012, that’s a long time. Did North Carolina stink for their first 18 years? How about UNC, they last won a championship in 2017, I guess they have been irrelevant ever since? How about ND, BC, and Syracuse? Do they all stink? Based on your logic none of the three have done anything? I guess they all stink. According to your foolish opinion if you are not the favorite to win a championship you are irrelevant and must stink.

No, we all see your animosity, we just don’t know what causes it. I haven’t seen anyone come on here and predict that Maryland was going to win the Championship however very few will “honestly” say “they stink”. I would say they are off from where they were but to say they stink is a bit much. But I guess if we use your logic pretty much every team that doesn’t win the championship “stinks” therefore all of those players must stink as well. Good luck with your distorted snide opinions, I’m sure you are a pleasure to be around.

Forget him, we all know the type, they have been disparaging players, club teams, HS Teams, All-Star Team Selection, College Teams, etc... since their daughter was in grade school. This one stinks, that one stinks etc... Not worth responding to people like that.

Drexel at Towson Tonight - 6:00pm.

Towson 12 - 11 @ Home

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel at Towson Tonight - 6:00pm.

Towson 12 - 11 @ Home

Towson in the hole 10-2 ... halftime. Drexel looks very good.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel at Towson Tonight - 6:00pm.

Towson 12 - 11 @ Home

Drexel is legit. Can compete with any team ranked 10 - 20. Maybe
Maybe even higher, hope we get to see it happen. Towson is a solid team. Drexel is very good!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel at Towson Tonight - 6:00pm.

Towson 12 - 11 @ Home

Drexel is legit. Can compete with any team ranked 10 - 20. Maybe
Maybe even higher, hope we get to see it happen. Towson is a solid team. Drexel is very good!

I watched the game last night. Drexel has at least 5 girls that can go to goal. They also have a good defense and goalie. They can possibly surprise some top ten teams. I think they are as good as 4 thru 10 in rankings

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel at Towson Tonight - 6:00pm.

Towson 12 - 11 @ Home

Drexel is legit. Can compete with any team ranked 10 - 20. Maybe
Maybe even higher, hope we get to see it happen. Towson is a solid team. Drexel is very good!

I watched the game last night. Drexel has at least 5 girls that can go to goal. They also have a good defense and goalie. They can possibly surprise some top ten teams. I think they are as good as 4 thru 10 in rankings

Agree. They are well coached too.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel at Towson Tonight - 6:00pm.

Towson 12 - 11 @ Home

Drexel is legit. Can compete with any team ranked 10 - 20. Maybe
Maybe even higher, hope we get to see it happen. Towson is a solid team. Drexel is very good!

I watched the game last night. Drexel has at least 5 girls that can go to goal. They also have a good defense and goalie. They can possibly surprise some top ten teams. I think they are as good as 4 thru 10 in rankings

Agree. They are well coached too.

I think a solid zone D could slow them down as they look to dodge from the top 90% of time. Towson is a one on one defense but got beat a lot last night. They came out in zone in second half and slowed Drexel down for a little while. I do not think Towson plays zone much at all so it was not too strong

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel at Towson Tonight - 6:00pm.

Towson 12 - 11 @ Home

Drexel is legit. Can compete with any team ranked 10 - 20. Maybe
Maybe even higher, hope we get to see it happen. Towson is a solid team. Drexel is very good!

I watched the game last night. Drexel has at least 5 girls that can go to goal. They also have a good defense and goalie. They can possibly surprise some top ten teams. I think they are as good as 4 thru 10 in rankings

Agree. They are well coached too.

I think a solid zone D could slow them down as they look to dodge from the top 90% of time. Towson is a one on one defense but got beat a lot last night. They came out in zone in second half and slowed Drexel down for a little while. I do not think Towson plays zone much at all so it was not too strong

If you have the athletes Man to Man is the best option... Towson has excellent defenders the mids are not as strong as their base... they are OK just not as strong as the D... Not knocking or trying to be a MeanyJust my observation.... I think Drexel Looked great. Where you attack from and how you attack is dictated by what type of defense the other team is playing... Drexel is well coached and they identified the defense , adjusted , executed and exploited the zone. Towson is a solid team with a very good D. I agree I am pretty sure Towson likes to play man. I was very impressed with Drexel, it was the first opportunity I have had to watch them play. Fairly new coach I believe, CAA is now tougher, Hope Delaware coach can elevate their program over the next couple of years, Elon looking good, Towson and obviously JMU are always tough... William and Mary is a great school with a lot to offer and they traditionally challenge themselves with a tough out of conference schedule (a few ACC Teams, Richmond, Vanderbilt etc...)

Good for Drexel, Good for the sport.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel at Towson Tonight - 6:00pm.

Towson 12 - 11 @ Home

Drexel is legit. Can compete with any team ranked 10 - 20. Maybe
Maybe even higher, hope we get to see it happen. Towson is a solid team. Drexel is very good!

I watched the game last night. Drexel has at least 5 girls that can go to goal. They also have a good defense and goalie. They can possibly surprise some top ten teams. I think they are as good as 4 thru 10 in rankings

Agree. They are well coached too.

I think a solid zone D could slow them down as they look to dodge from the top 90% of time. Towson is a one on one defense but got beat a lot last night. They came out in zone in second half and slowed Drexel down for a little while. I do not think Towson plays zone much at all so it was not too strong

If you have the athletes Man to Man is the best option... Towson has excellent defenders the mids are not as strong as their base... they are OK just not as strong as the D... Not knocking or trying to be a MeanyJust my observation.... I think Drexel Looked great. Where you attack from and how you attack is dictated by what type of defense the other team is playing... Drexel is well coached and they identified the defense , adjusted , executed and exploited the zone. Towson is a solid team with a very good D. I agree I am pretty sure Towson likes to play man. I was very impressed with Drexel, it was the first opportunity I have had to watch them play. Fairly new coach I believe, CAA is now tougher, Hope Delaware coach can elevate their program over the next couple of years, Elon looking good, Towson and obviously JMU are always tough... William and Mary is a great school with a lot to offer and they traditionally challenge themselves with a tough out of conference schedule (a few ACC Teams, Richmond, Vanderbilt etc...)

Good for Drexel, Good for the sport.

You forgot Hofstra...just beat JMU 13-7 last weekend.

Any thoughts on Jacksonville at #9 or #10? One squeaker against Florida and you are in the Top 10?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any thoughts on Jacksonville at #9 or #10? One squeaker against Florida and you are in the Top 10?

No problem with Jacksonville, quality win over Florida. Stony Brook on the other hand not justified, SBU should not be in the Top 10.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any thoughts on Jacksonville at #9 or #10? One squeaker against Florida and you are in the Top 10?

No problem with Jacksonville, quality win over Florida. Stony Brook on the other hand not justified, SBU should not be in the Top 10.

I don't know. I don't think JU would be able to fully stop Stony Brook. I get that JU edged Florida, but JU doesn't play a tough schedule, either. I guess we will see when the tourney starts.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any thoughts on Jacksonville at #9 or #10? One squeaker against Florida and you are in the Top 10?

No problem with Jacksonville, quality win over Florida. Stony Brook on the other hand not justified, SBU should not be in the Top 10.

I don't know. I don't think JU would be able to fully stop Stony Brook. I get that JU edged Florida, but JU doesn't play a tough schedule, either. I guess we will see when the tourney starts.

I agree...who has Florida beat

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any thoughts on Jacksonville at #9 or #10? One squeaker against Florida and you are in the Top 10?

No problem with Jacksonville, quality win over Florida. Stony Brook on the other hand not justified, SBU should not be in the Top 10.

I don't know. I don't think JU would be able to fully stop Stony Brook. I get that JU edged Florida, but JU doesn't play a tough schedule, either. I guess we will see when the tourney starts.

I agree...who has Florida beat

Who really knows this year? 6 or 7 perennial Top 20 Teams are not competing and there has been limited out of conference competition for most teams. Stony Brook is being ranked on their past and Drexel knocked off a perennial Top 10 - 20 Team and has a strong record.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any thoughts on Jacksonville at #9 or #10? One squeaker against Florida and you are in the Top 10?

No problem with Jacksonville, quality win over Florida. Stony Brook on the other hand not justified, SBU should not be in the Top 10.

I don't know. I don't think JU would be able to fully stop Stony Brook. I get that JU edged Florida, but JU doesn't play a tough schedule, either. I guess we will see when the tourney starts.

I agree...who has Florida beat

Who really knows this year? 6 or 7 perennial Top 20 Teams are not competing and there has been limited out of conference competition for most teams. Stony Brook is being ranked on their past and Drexel knocked off a perennial Top 10 - 20 Team and has a strong record.

Which perennial top 20 teams are not competing 6-7 , I don’t think so

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any thoughts on Jacksonville at #9 or #10? One squeaker against Florida and you are in the Top 10?

No problem with Jacksonville, quality win over Florida. Stony Brook on the other hand not justified, SBU should not be in the Top 10.

I don't know. I don't think JU would be able to fully stop Stony Brook. I get that JU edged Florida, but JU doesn't play a tough schedule, either. I guess we will see when the tourney starts.

I agree...who has Florida beat

Who really knows this year? 6 or 7 perennial Top 20 Teams are not competing and there has been limited out of conference competition for most teams. Stony Brook is being ranked on their past and Drexel knocked off a perennial Top 10 - 20 Team and has a strong record.

Which perennial top 20 teams are not competing 6-7 , I don’t think so

I’m guessing top 3 - 4 Big 10 and top 2 - 3 Ivy’s. Maryland, Northwestern, Penn State, Princeton and Penn always in the mix. Most years there is another Big and or Ivy in the Top 20. Probably more like 5 but then add an additional big or Ivy and you get 6 ....

The Big 10 is playnig...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The Big 10 is playnig...

Only among themselves so other teams are not facing Northwestern, Maryland, Penn State, Hopkins, etc...

The big ten teams are playing in the NCAA tournament .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The big ten teams are playing in the NCAA tournament

The only Big 10 team with a shot at making the tournament is Northwestern. The biggest disappointments have to be Maryland and Penn St.

.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The big ten teams are playing in the NCAA tournament

The only Big 10 team with a shot at making the tournament is Northwestern. The biggest disappointments have to be Maryland and Penn St.

.

Do you really think the only Big Ten Team will be Northwestern?

Typical post from a low life ... nothing positive, nothing informative, nothing but snide nonsense. What went wrong with your life.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The big ten teams are playing in the NCAA tournament

The only Big 10 team with a shot at making the tournament is Northwestern. The biggest disappointments have to be Maryland and Penn St.

.

Do you really think the only Big Ten Team will be Northwestern?

Typical post from a low life ... nothing positive, nothing informative, nothing but snide nonsense. What went wrong with your life.

Will be interesting in how they pick which teams make it in out of the big ten as other than NW no one really separating themselves from the pack

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The big ten teams are playing in the NCAA tournament

The only Big 10 team with a shot at making the tournament is Northwestern. The biggest disappointments have to be Maryland and Penn St.

.

Do you really think the only Big Ten Team will be Northwestern?

Typical post from a low life ... nothing positive, nothing informative, nothing but snide nonsense. What went wrong with your life.

Will be interesting in how they pick which teams make it in out of the big ten as other than NW no one really separating themselves from the pack

I agree, outside of Northwestern you will probably take Maryland. But afte that you either leave all the others out or take them all. They are all under .500 and seem to have beaten each other at one point in time during the year. It will be a difficult decision

Watching BC play I hope CN never wins a championship nor the Tewaaraton . Worst sportsmanship , terrible teammate and yet inside lax promotes her like that’s the standard that little girls should be looking up to . How many junk time goals and over the top celebrations can one player have . Senior day and all that kid cares about is her own stats while you have senior players who never play on the field in a blowout game .

North is best player in wlax this year. Sorry to the UNC crowd.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

North is best player in wlax this year. Sorry to the UNC crowd.

The kid is very good but not the best player , it’s obvious it’s all about her and she has never been on a team that wins a big game which tells me she does not make anyone around her better . Given the choice there are many players who I would rather have my kid play with than that one . Scane is a much better player and at least does not act like every junk time goal is the NCAA championship . Not sure what UNC has to do with the topic but I would take Trenchard over Scane every time .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Watching BC play I hope CN never wins a championship nor the Tewaaraton . Worst sportsmanship , terrible teammate and yet inside lax promotes her like that’s the standard that little girls should be looking up to . How many junk time goals and over the top celebrations can one player have . Senior day and all that kid cares about is her own stats while you have senior players who never play on the field in a blowout game .

Sorry dude. She dominated ND both games. Appears you are an ND fan ok i get you have a burr in the saddle after 2 blowouts. She dominated the draw. ND couldnt guard her, and on the off chance they actually did stop her she passed and got the assist. Its crazy that people here try to say the usual nonsense.........she is a terrible teammate?-How do you know. Junk goals?-she has a viscous shot and scores throughout the game. Over the top celebrations?-then stop her. Sorry... the 2 UNC women are great one way players-feeder and scorer. Although I would like to see defense get more notoriety, North dominates games.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Watching BC play I hope CN never wins a championship nor the Tewaaraton . Worst sportsmanship , terrible teammate and yet inside lax promotes her like that’s the standard that little girls should be looking up to . How many junk time goals and over the top celebrations can one player have . Senior day and all that kid cares about is her own stats while you have senior players who never play on the field in a blowout game .

Sorry dude. She dominated ND both games. Appears you are an ND fan ok i get you have a burr in the saddle after 2 blowouts. She dominated the draw. ND couldnt guard her, and on the off chance they actually did stop her she passed and got the assist. Its crazy that people here try to say the usual nonsense.........she is a terrible teammate?-How do you know. Junk goals?-she has a viscous shot and scores throughout the game. Over the top celebrations?-then stop her. Sorry... the 2 UNC women are great one way players-feeder and scorer. Although I would like to see defense get more notoriety, North dominates games.

I don't think this poster was specifically naming ND game but maybe the VT game last week where she had to score her 10th goal of the game when they were already up by 10 goals - with 4 seconds left. To many people that reeks of grabbing the glory and the stats...she could have passed to a teammate that doesn't see much playing time...but then that would show sportsmanship. And how do people know what kind of teammate she is? because the lacrosse community is very small and players talk amongst themselves.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Watching BC play I hope CN never wins a championship nor the Tewaaraton . Worst sportsmanship , terrible teammate and yet inside lax promotes her like that’s the standard that little girls should be looking up to . How many junk time goals and over the top celebrations can one player have . Senior day and all that kid cares about is her own stats while you have senior players who never play on the field in a blowout game .

Sorry dude. She dominated ND both games. Appears you are an ND fan ok i get you have a burr in the saddle after 2 blowouts. She dominated the draw. ND couldnt guard her, and on the off chance they actually did stop her she passed and got the assist. Its crazy that people here try to say the usual nonsense.........she is a terrible teammate?-How do you know. Junk goals?-she has a viscous shot and scores throughout the game. Over the top celebrations?-then stop her. Sorry... the 2 UNC women are great one way players-feeder and scorer. Although I would like to see defense get more notoriety, North dominates games.

So now I am a ND fan , before you thought I was a UNC fan , the only thing those comments show is you are misinformed. How do I know she is a “terrible “ teammate because I watch her play , end of blowout games it’s all about her and not getting freshman who rarely play involved or on senior day it’s all about her even though there are players on the field that have been on that team for 4-5 years who rarely get to play . Just ask the Duke players about her . How about scoring her 11th goal of the game with 1 second left in a game that was a complete mismatch , that’s a bad teammate and honestly an embarrassment. The good news is Scane or Ortega will win the Tewaaraton as those that know and actually watch the game will not want her to win it . She did not dominate the UNC or either Louisville game and honestly I hope they give the award to the best defender in the game .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The big ten teams are playing in the NCAA tournament

The only Big 10 team with a shot at making the tournament is Northwestern. The biggest disappointments have to be Maryland and Penn St.

.

Do you really think the only Big Ten Team will be Northwestern?

Typical post from a low life ... nothing positive, nothing informative, nothing but snide nonsense. What went wrong with your life.

Will be interesting in how they pick which teams make it in out of the big ten as other than NW no one really separating themselves from the pack

I agree, outside of Northwestern you will probably take Maryland. But afte that you either leave all the others out or take them all. They are all under .500 and seem to have beaten each other at one point in time during the year. It will be a difficult decision

In Division I women's lacrosse a teams record is not a very good measure of a team. With such disparity of ability and team strength in the Division I ranks a teams record means very little.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Watching BC play I hope CN never wins a championship nor the Tewaaraton . Worst sportsmanship , terrible teammate and yet inside lax promotes her like that’s the standard that little girls should be looking up to . How many junk time goals and over the top celebrations can one player have . Senior day and all that kid cares about is her own stats while you have senior players who never play on the field in a blowout game .

Sorry dude. She dominated ND both games. Appears you are an ND fan ok i get you have a burr in the saddle after 2 blowouts. She dominated the draw. ND couldnt guard her, and on the off chance they actually did stop her she passed and got the assist. Its crazy that people here try to say the usual nonsense.........she is a terrible teammate?-How do you know. Junk goals?-she has a viscous shot and scores throughout the game. Over the top celebrations?-then stop her. Sorry... the 2 UNC women are great one way players-feeder and scorer. Although I would like to see defense get more notoriety, North dominates games.

So now I am a ND fan , before you thought I was a UNC fan , the only thing those comments show is you are misinformed. How do I know she is a “terrible “ teammate because I watch her play , end of blowout games it’s all about her and not getting freshman who rarely play involved or on senior day it’s all about her even though there are players on the field that have been on that team for 4-5 years who rarely get to play . Just ask the Duke players about her . How about scoring her 11th goal of the game with 1 second left in a game that was a complete mismatch , that’s a bad teammate and honestly an embarrassment. The good news is Scane or Ortega will win the Tewaaraton as those that know and actually watch the game will not want her to win it . She did not dominate the UNC or either Louisville game and honestly I hope they give the award to the best defender in the game .

Dont know who you are or what fan you are. Dont care. You "know" she is a terrible teammate because you watch her?? Geez...stop with your subjective "you watch games" analysis. Her TEAM wins games. That makes a good teammate. The rest of the stuff you said is whining drival. Oh and I love the quote" those that know will not let her win it". Are you one of those that know??? Of course you are not. And please provide facts regarding how many goals Hoegh, Scane, Ortega, etc have provided the freshmen and non-playing seniors on their teams so you can inform all of us since "you are in the know" about what good teammates they are. OK, I will make it easier.....how many draw controls do those players have since you are "in the know". Again... if teams dont like her scoring/celebrating.....stop her. If you cant stop her stop whining. She wins draws, scores goals, gets assists=Tewaaraton

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Watching BC play I hope CN never wins a championship nor the Tewaaraton . Worst sportsmanship , terrible teammate and yet inside lax promotes her like that’s the standard that little girls should be looking up to . How many junk time goals and over the top celebrations can one player have . Senior day and all that kid cares about is her own stats while you have senior players who never play on the field in a blowout game .

Sorry dude. She dominated ND both games. Appears you are an ND fan ok i get you have a burr in the saddle after 2 blowouts. She dominated the draw. ND couldnt guard her, and on the off chance they actually did stop her she passed and got the assist. Its crazy that people here try to say the usual nonsense.........she is a terrible teammate?-How do you know. Junk goals?-she has a viscous shot and scores throughout the game. Over the top celebrations?-then stop her. Sorry... the 2 UNC women are great one way players-feeder and scorer. Although I would like to see defense get more notoriety, North dominates games.

So now I am a ND fan , before you thought I was a UNC fan , the only thing those comments show is you are misinformed. How do I know she is a “terrible “ teammate because I watch her play , end of blowout games it’s all about her and not getting freshman who rarely play involved or on senior day it’s all about her even though there are players on the field that have been on that team for 4-5 years who rarely get to play . Just ask the Duke players about her . How about scoring her 11th goal of the game with 1 second left in a game that was a complete mismatch , that’s a bad teammate and honestly an embarrassment. The good news is Scane or Ortega will win the Tewaaraton as those that know and actually watch the game will not want her to win it . She did not dominate the UNC or either Louisville game and honestly I hope they give the award to the best defender in the game .

What you describe about the VT game does sound like poor sportsmanship...until you pull up the box score and see that her goal with 1 second left was assisted by a freshman getting her first career assist and second career goal. Before that goal, her last point was with 19 minutes left in the 2nd half. She plays with intensity and enthusiasm, but it does not strike me as poor sportsmanship, and I doubt whatever was going at Duke stemmed solely from North. She's an amazing player and BC as a team looks better each time I see them play this season.

Coaches Poll as of 4-12-2021

1 - North Carolina

2 - Northwestern

3 - Syracuse

4 - Notre Dame

5 - Boston College

6 - Stony Brook

7 - Virginia

8 - Duke

9 - Florida

10 - Jacksonville

T-11 - Loyola

T-11 - Maryland

13 - Penn State

14 - Drexel

15 - Towson

16 - Stanford

17 - Michigan

18 - Louisville

19 - Denver

20 - Johns Hopkins

21 - Richmond

22 - Ohio State

23 - Elon

24 - Rutgers

25 - Massachusetts

From 2015 - 2019 below is average number of "At Large Bids" by conference.

ACC - 5
B1G - 3
IVY - 2
CAA - 1
PAC - 1
Patriot - 1

BigE - 1 maybe
AE - 1 maybe

Most other conferences have not had multiple At Large Bids.

I would think this year will be similar however with no Ivy's there will be 2 - 3 open spots.

16 conference champs and 13 At Large Bids 29 Teams Total: At Large Bids: 5 ACC, 3 B1G, 1 CAA, 1 PAC, 1 Patriot, That will leave "2" Bids... Which conference will they come from?

North by far is the best all round player. Do people realize she may be the best draw girl in the country while Scane and Ortega don't do anything in that aspect of the game. Do you realize her overall stats are slightly ahead of Appuzzo when she won the award. North also has one of the highest shooting percentages in the NCAA. If you are being objective the race should not even be close.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Watching BC play I hope CN never wins a championship nor the Tewaaraton . Worst sportsmanship , terrible teammate and yet inside lax promotes her like that’s the standard that little girls should be looking up to . How many junk time goals and over the top celebrations can one player have . Senior day and all that kid cares about is her own stats while you have senior players who never play on the field in a blowout game .

Sorry dude. She dominated ND both games. Appears you are an ND fan ok i get you have a burr in the saddle after 2 blowouts. She dominated the draw. ND couldnt guard her, and on the off chance they actually did stop her she passed and got the assist. Its crazy that people here try to say the usual nonsense.........she is a terrible teammate?-How do you know. Junk goals?-she has a viscous shot and scores throughout the game. Over the top celebrations?-then stop her. Sorry... the 2 UNC women are great one way players-feeder and scorer. Although I would like to see defense get more notoriety, North dominates games.

So now I am a ND fan , before you thought I was a UNC fan , the only thing those comments show is you are misinformed. How do I know she is a “terrible “ teammate because I watch her play , end of blowout games it’s all about her and not getting freshman who rarely play involved or on senior day it’s all about her even though there are players on the field that have been on that team for 4-5 years who rarely get to play . Just ask the Duke players about her . How about scoring her 11th goal of the game with 1 second left in a game that was a complete mismatch , that’s a bad teammate and honestly an embarrassment. The good news is Scane or Ortega will win the Tewaaraton as those that know and actually watch the game will not want her to win it . She did not dominate the UNC or either Louisville game and honestly I hope they give the award to the best defender in the game .

Dont know who you are or what fan you are. Dont care. You "know" she is a terrible teammate because you watch her?? Geez...stop with your subjective "you watch games" analysis. Her TEAM wins games. That makes a good teammate. The rest of the stuff you said is whining drival. Oh and I love the quote" those that know will not let her win it". Are you one of those that know??? Of course you are not. And please provide facts regarding how many goals Hoegh, Scane, Ortega, etc have provided the freshmen and non-playing seniors on their teams so you can inform all of us since "you are in the know" about what good teammates they are. OK, I will make it easier.....how many draw controls do those players have since you are "in the know". Again... if teams dont like her scoring/celebrating.....stop her. If you cant stop her stop whining. She wins draws, scores goals, gets assists=Tewaaraton

You don’t care what type of fan I am yet you repeatedly bring it up . Her team wins games so that makes her a good teammate is laughable but if that’s your standard then every player on the UNC team is a better teammate . Of course it’s subjective if a player is a good teammate you are just too slow to know that . As far as the others that you are speaking of they are rarely in late in blowout games unlike BC stat padders . You obviously don’t even watch the kid play or you would not bring up her assist numbers. Seems you skipped over her former teammates opinion of her . North will not win it and it is most likely Scanes to lose as she has proven herself to be virtually unstoppable unlike North . I am not one of those who are involved in the selection process but I am friendly with one of the selection committee . I do agree she will have several things in common w Apuzzo ..

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Watching BC play I hope CN never wins a championship nor the Tewaaraton . Worst sportsmanship , terrible teammate and yet inside lax promotes her like that’s the standard that little girls should be looking up to . How many junk time goals and over the top celebrations can one player have . Senior day and all that kid cares about is her own stats while you have senior players who never play on the field in a blowout game .

Sorry dude. She dominated ND both games. Appears you are an ND fan ok i get you have a burr in the saddle after 2 blowouts. She dominated the draw. ND couldnt guard her, and on the off chance they actually did stop her she passed and got the assist. Its crazy that people here try to say the usual nonsense.........she is a terrible teammate?-How do you know. Junk goals?-she has a viscous shot and scores throughout the game. Over the top celebrations?-then stop her. Sorry... the 2 UNC women are great one way players-feeder and scorer. Although I would like to see defense get more notoriety, North dominates games.

So now I am a ND fan , before you thought I was a UNC fan , the only thing those comments show is you are misinformed. How do I know she is a “terrible “ teammate because I watch her play , end of blowout games it’s all about her and not getting freshman who rarely play involved or on senior day it’s all about her even though there are players on the field that have been on that team for 4-5 years who rarely get to play . Just ask the Duke players about her . How about scoring her 11th goal of the game with 1 second left in a game that was a complete mismatch , that’s a bad teammate and honestly an embarrassment. The good news is Scane or Ortega will win the Tewaaraton as those that know and actually watch the game will not want her to win it . She did not dominate the UNC or either Louisville game and honestly I hope they give the award to the best defender in the game .

Dont know who you are or what fan you are. Dont care. You "know" she is a terrible teammate because you watch her?? Geez...stop with your subjective "you watch games" analysis. Her TEAM wins games. That makes a good teammate. The rest of the stuff you said is whining drival. Oh and I love the quote" those that know will not let her win it". Are you one of those that know??? Of course you are not. And please provide facts regarding how many goals Hoegh, Scane, Ortega, etc have provided the freshmen and non-playing seniors on their teams so you can inform all of us since "you are in the know" about what good teammates they are. OK, I will make it easier.....how many draw controls do those players have since you are "in the know". Again... if teams dont like her scoring/celebrating.....stop her. If you cant stop her stop whining. She wins draws, scores goals, gets assists=Tewaaraton

You don’t care what type of fan I am yet you repeatedly bring it up . Her team wins games so that makes her a good teammate is laughable but if that’s your standard then every player on the UNC team is a better teammate . Of course it’s subjective if a player is a good teammate you are just too slow to know that . As far as the others that you are speaking of they are rarely in late in blowout games unlike BC stat padders . You obviously don’t even watch the kid play or you would not bring up her assist numbers. Seems you skipped over her former teammates opinion of her . North will not win it and it is most likely Scanes to lose as she has proven herself to be virtually unstoppable unlike North . I am not one of those who are involved in the selection process but I am friendly with one of the selection committee . I do agree she will have several things in common w Apuzzo ..

Over 100 draw controls + best pure offensive player= Tewaaratan

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The big ten teams are playing in the NCAA tournament

The only Big 10 team with a shot at making the tournament is Northwestern. The biggest disappointments have to be Maryland and Penn St.

.

Do you really think the only Big Ten Team will be Northwestern?

Typical post from a low life ... nothing positive, nothing informative, nothing but snide nonsense. What went wrong with your life.

Will be interesting in how they pick which teams make it in out of the big ten as other than NW no one really separating themselves from the pack

I agree, outside of Northwestern you will probably take Maryland. But afte that you either leave all the others out or take them all. They are all under .500 and seem to have beaten each other at one point in time during the year. It will be a difficult decision

In Division I women's lacrosse a teams record is not a very good measure of a team. With such disparity of ability and team strength in the Division I ranks a teams record means very little.

I am starting to think that a teams record is a very good indicator. You have been harping on this a little too much. Rutgers, Ohio State, Penn State. Michigan....just not that good. Maryland better hope they get in

Why do you think a teams record matters in Women’s Lacrosse? Do you actually believe a teams record is reflective of where a team stands in relation to all Division I Teams? Please explain the logic behind that opinion.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Watching BC play I hope CN never wins a championship nor the Tewaaraton . Worst sportsmanship , terrible teammate and yet inside lax promotes her like that’s the standard that little girls should be looking up to . How many junk time goals and over the top celebrations can one player have . Senior day and all that kid cares about is her own stats while you have senior players who never play on the field in a blowout game .

Sorry dude. She dominated ND both games. Appears you are an ND fan ok i get you have a burr in the saddle after 2 blowouts. She dominated the draw. ND couldnt guard her, and on the off chance they actually did stop her she passed and got the assist. Its crazy that people here try to say the usual nonsense.........she is a terrible teammate?-How do you know. Junk goals?-she has a viscous shot and scores throughout the game. Over the top celebrations?-then stop her. Sorry... the 2 UNC women are great one way players-feeder and scorer. Although I would like to see defense get more notoriety, North dominates games.

So now I am a ND fan , before you thought I was a UNC fan , the only thing those comments show is you are misinformed. How do I know she is a “terrible “ teammate because I watch her play , end of blowout games it’s all about her and not getting freshman who rarely play involved or on senior day it’s all about her even though there are players on the field that have been on that team for 4-5 years who rarely get to play . Just ask the Duke players about her . How about scoring her 11th goal of the game with 1 second left in a game that was a complete mismatch , that’s a bad teammate and honestly an embarrassment. The good news is Scane or Ortega will win the Tewaaraton as those that know and actually watch the game will not want her to win it . She did not dominate the UNC or either Louisville game and honestly I hope they give the award to the best defender in the game .

Dont know who you are or what fan you are. Dont care. You "know" she is a terrible teammate because you watch her?? Geez...stop with your subjective "you watch games" analysis. Her TEAM wins games. That makes a good teammate. The rest of the stuff you said is whining drival. Oh and I love the quote" those that know will not let her win it". Are you one of those that know??? Of course you are not. And please provide facts regarding how many goals Hoegh, Scane, Ortega, etc have provided the freshmen and non-playing seniors on their teams so you can inform all of us since "you are in the know" about what good teammates they are. OK, I will make it easier.....how many draw controls do those players have since you are "in the know". Again... if teams dont like her scoring/celebrating.....stop her. If you cant stop her stop whining. She wins draws, scores goals, gets assists=Tewaaraton

You don’t care what type of fan I am yet you repeatedly bring it up . Her team wins games so that makes her a good teammate is laughable but if that’s your standard then every player on the UNC team is a better teammate . Of course it’s subjective if a player is a good teammate you are just too slow to know that . As far as the others that you are speaking of they are rarely in late in blowout games unlike BC stat padders . You obviously don’t even watch the kid play or you would not bring up her assist numbers. Seems you skipped over her former teammates opinion of her . North will not win it and it is most likely Scanes to lose as she has proven herself to be virtually unstoppable unlike North . I am not one of those who are involved in the selection process but I am friendly with one of the selection committee . I do agree she will have several things in common w Apuzzo ..

Over 100 draw controls + best pure offensive player= Tewaaratan

My favorite CN stat padding goal was the last one against USC , game essentially over with the announcer saying BC will hold the ball until the game over ,sophomore BC player has open goal but elects to pump fake at the goal but makes the mistake of passing to CN who runs to goal and puts in a cheap one , no teammates congratulate her . Maybe she was trying to get a younger player a draw control. CN has been shut down multiple times this year , Scane has not . Scane has elevated her team to be the best in their conference , North not even close . Scane has teammates who actually like playing with her ...

I like North or Scane for T. Ortega is 3rd, won't get it. North and Scane on another level. Incredible players to watch. Stop trying to put down a player who's talent is off the charts. I'd be happy to see either one of them get it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

In Division I women's lacrosse a teams record is not a very good measure of a team. With such disparity of ability and team strength in the Division I ranks a teams record means very little.

I am starting to think that a teams record is a very good indicator. You have been harping on this a little too much. Rutgers, Ohio State, Penn State. Michigan....just not that good. Maryland better hope they get in[/quote]

*******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

A teams record is absolutely a very good indicator of how teams compare.

4/19/21 - Top 30

1 - North Carolina: 14 - 0

2 - Northwestern: 11 - 0

3 - Stanford: 8 - 0

4 - Jacksonville: 6 - 0

5 - Boston College: 11 - 1

6 - Syracuse: 11 - 1

7 - Drexel: 10 - 1

8 - Denver: 10 - 1

9 - Fairfield: 8 - 1

10 - Richmond: 8 - 1

11 - Elon: 8 - 1

12 - Mt. St Mary's: 11 - 2

13 - UMass: 11 - 2

14 - Florida: 11 - 2

15 - Robert Morris: 10 - 2

16 - Davidson: 10 - 2

17 - LIU: 9 - 2

18 - Loyola: 8 - 2

19 - Monmouth: 7 - 2

20 - Stony Brook: 7 - 2

21 - Siena: 6 - 2

22 - Temple: 10 - 3

23 - Furman: 9 - 3

24 - Lehigh: 6 - 3

25 - Navy: 6 - 3

26 - Niagra: 5 - 3

27 - Duquesne: 4 - 3

28 - Vanderbilt: 11 - 4

29 - Arizona St: 8 - 4

30 - Towson: 8 - 4

CN is the most dynamic and dominant player playing in the toughest conference. She plays the game at a different level than everyone else. That is obvious. She is also an elite draw specialist - perhaps the best in the country. Scane is a great offensive talent as well but its hard to say that she is not stat padding at all when she shoots 13 times per game and the average margin of victory for NW this year is 10 goals. Their games are pretty much over in the first 15 minutes of each game.

People on this thread are funny. Team record doesn’t matter. Player stats don’t matter. It’s “well I watch games” and then some whining diatribe about “the conference is the best” or “teammates don’t like the player”. Sorry.... record and stats matter. If they didn’t why play the games. I get that people have an agenda but the excuses never stop.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

People on this thread are funny. Team record doesn’t matter. Player stats don’t matter. It’s “well I watch games” and then some whining diatribe about “the conference is the best” or “teammates don’t like the player”. Sorry.... record and stats matter. If they didn’t why play the games. I get that people have an agenda but the excuses never stop.

I guess that you would agree with the rankings below...

A teams record is absolutely a very good indicator of how teams compare.

4/19/21 - Top 30

1 - North Carolina: 14 - 0

2 - Northwestern: 11 - 0

3 - Stanford: 8 - 0

4 - Jacksonville: 6 - 0

5 - Boston College: 11 - 1

6 - Syracuse: 11 - 1

7 - Drexel: 10 - 1

8 - Denver: 10 - 1

9 - Fairfield: 8 - 1

10 - Richmond: 8 - 1

11 - Elon: 8 - 1

12 - Mt. St Mary's: 11 - 2

13 - UMass: 11 - 2

14 - Florida: 11 - 2

15 - Robert Morris: 10 - 2

16 - Davidson: 10 - 2

17 - LIU: 9 - 2

18 - Loyola: 8 - 2

19 - Monmouth: 7 - 2

20 - Stony Brook: 7 - 2

21 - Siena: 6 - 2

22 - Temple: 10 - 3

23 - Furman: 9 - 3

24 - Lehigh: 6 - 3

25 - Navy: 6 - 3

26 - Niagra: 5 - 3

27 - Duquesne: 4 - 3

28 - Vanderbilt: 11 - 4

29 - Arizona St: 8 - 4

30 - Towson: 8 - 4

Originally Posted by Anonymous

CN is the most dynamic and dominant player playing in the toughest conference. She plays the game at a different level than everyone else. That is obvious. She is also an elite draw specialist - perhaps the best in the country. Scane is a great offensive talent as well but its hard to say that she is not stat padding at all when she shoots 13 times per game and the average margin of victory for NW this year is 10 goals. Their games are pretty much over in the first 15 minutes of each game.

Agree, it’s a two horse race. The Player whose team goes the furthest in the tournament will have an advantage.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

People on this thread are funny. Team record doesn’t matter. Player stats don’t matter. It’s “well I watch games” and then some whining diatribe about “the conference is the best” or “teammates don’t like the player”. Sorry.... record and stats matter. If they didn’t why play the games. I get that people have an agenda but the excuses never stop.

I guess that you would agree with the rankings below...

A teams record is absolutely a very good indicator of how teams compare.

4/19/21 - Top 30

1 - North Carolina: 14 - 0

2 - Northwestern: 11 - 0

3 - Stanford: 8 - 0

4 - Jacksonville: 6 - 0

5 - Boston College: 11 - 1

6 - Syracuse: 11 - 1

7 - Drexel: 10 - 1

8 - Denver: 10 - 1

9 - Fairfield: 8 - 1

10 - Richmond: 8 - 1

11 - Elon: 8 - 1

12 - Mt. St Mary's: 11 - 2

13 - UMass: 11 - 2

14 - Florida: 11 - 2

15 - Robert Morris: 10 - 2

16 - Davidson: 10 - 2

17 - LIU: 9 - 2

18 - Loyola: 8 - 2

19 - Monmouth: 7 - 2

20 - Stony Brook: 7 - 2

21 - Siena: 6 - 2

22 - Temple: 10 - 3

23 - Furman: 9 - 3

24 - Lehigh: 6 - 3

25 - Navy: 6 - 3

26 - Niagra: 5 - 3

27 - Duquesne: 4 - 3

28 - Vanderbilt: 11 - 4

29 - Arizona St: 8 - 4

30 - Towson: 8 - 4

Obviously we will see in a few weeks. That’s why they PLAY the tournament games. Until then speculation is fun but still just speculation.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

People on this thread are funny. Team record doesn’t matter. Player stats don’t matter. It’s “well I watch games” and then some whining diatribe about “the conference is the best” or “teammates don’t like the player”. Sorry.... record and stats matter. If they didn’t why play the games. I get that people have an agenda but the excuses never stop.

I guess that you would agree with the rankings below...

A teams record is absolutely a very good indicator of how teams compare.

4/19/21 - Top 30

1 - North Carolina: 14 - 0

2 - Northwestern: 11 - 0

3 - Stanford: 8 - 0

4 - Jacksonville: 6 - 0

5 - Boston College: 11 - 1

6 - Syracuse: 11 - 1

7 - Drexel: 10 - 1

8 - Denver: 10 - 1

9 - Fairfield: 8 - 1

10 - Richmond: 8 - 1

11 - Elon: 8 - 1

12 - Mt. St Mary's: 11 - 2

13 - UMass: 11 - 2

14 - Florida: 11 - 2

15 - Robert Morris: 10 - 2

16 - Davidson: 10 - 2

17 - LIU: 9 - 2

18 - Loyola: 8 - 2

19 - Monmouth: 7 - 2

20 - Stony Brook: 7 - 2

21 - Siena: 6 - 2

22 - Temple: 10 - 3

23 - Furman: 9 - 3

24 - Lehigh: 6 - 3

25 - Navy: 6 - 3

26 - Niagra: 5 - 3

27 - Duquesne: 4 - 3

28 - Vanderbilt: 11 - 4

29 - Arizona St: 8 - 4

30 - Towson: 8 - 4

Obviously we will see in a few weeks. That’s why they PLAY the tournament games. Until then speculation is fun but still just speculation.

I don’t think they are speculating, I believe they are making the point that a teams record is not necessarily a very good barometer for ranking teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

CN is the most dynamic and dominant player playing in the toughest conference. She plays the game at a different level than everyone else. That is obvious. She is also an elite draw specialist - perhaps the best in the country. Scane is a great offensive talent as well but its hard to say that she is not stat padding at all when she shoots 13 times per game and the average margin of victory for NW this year is 10 goals. Their games are pretty much over in the first 15 minutes of each game.

North has been shut down multiple times this year ,Scane and Ortega have not. If you dont think her over the top celebrations will impact the tewaaraton selection committee you are wrong. Is she the flashiest player in the country yes , does taking essentially every draw even in blowout wins help her chances yes.For a player who has the ball in her stick as much as she does the lack of assists is noticeable. I hope a defender gets the award but unlikely.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

People on this thread are funny. Team record doesn’t matter. Player stats don’t matter. It’s “well I watch games” and then some whining diatribe about “the conference is the best” or “teammates don’t like the player”. Sorry.... record and stats matter. If they didn’t why play the games. I get that people have an agenda but the excuses never stop.

I guess that you would agree with the rankings below...

A teams record is absolutely a very good indicator of how teams compare.

4/19/21 - Top 30

1 - North Carolina: 14 - 0

2 - Northwestern: 11 - 0

3 - Stanford: 8 - 0

4 - Jacksonville: 6 - 0

5 - Boston College: 11 - 1

6 - Syracuse: 11 - 1

7 - Drexel: 10 - 1

8 - Denver: 10 - 1

9 - Fairfield: 8 - 1

10 - Richmond: 8 - 1

11 - Elon: 8 - 1

12 - Mt. St Mary's: 11 - 2

13 - UMass: 11 - 2

14 - Florida: 11 - 2

15 - Robert Morris: 10 - 2

16 - Davidson: 10 - 2

17 - LIU: 9 - 2

18 - Loyola: 8 - 2

19 - Monmouth: 7 - 2

20 - Stony Brook: 7 - 2

21 - Siena: 6 - 2

22 - Temple: 10 - 3

23 - Furman: 9 - 3

24 - Lehigh: 6 - 3

25 - Navy: 6 - 3

26 - Niagra: 5 - 3

27 - Duquesne: 4 - 3

28 - Vanderbilt: 11 - 4

29 - Arizona St: 8 - 4

30 - Towson: 8 - 4

Obviously we will see in a few weeks. That’s why they PLAY the tournament games. Until then speculation is fun but still just speculation.

I don’t think they are speculating, I believe they are making the point that a teams record is not necessarily a very good barometer for ranking teams.

If the season were to end today how would the tournament look?

16 Automatic Bids

1 - AAC - Florida
2 - ACC - North Carolina
3 - AE - Stony Brook
4 - ASUN - Jacksonville
5 - A-10 - UMass
6 - Big E - Denver
7 - Big So - High Point
8 - B1G - Northwestern
9 - CAA - Drexel
10 - MAAC - Fairfield
11 - MAC - Robert Morris
12 - MPSF - UC Davis
13 - NEC - Mount St Marry's
14 - PAC12 - Stanford
15 - Patriot - Loyola
16 - SoCon - Furman

13 At Large Bids

1 - Boston College - ACC 11 - 1
2 - Syracuse - ACC 11 - 1
3 - Richmond - A10 8 - 1
4 - Elon - CAA 8 - 1
5 - Mount St Mary - NEC 10 - 2
6 - Davidson - A10 10 - 2
7 - LIU - NEC 9 - 2
8 - Monmouth - MAAC 7 - 2
9 - Siena - MAAC 6 - 2
10 - Temple - AAC 10 - 3
11 - Lehigh - Patriot 6 - 3
12 - Navy - Patriot 6 - 3
13 - Niagara - MAAC 5 - 3

Originally Posted by Anonymous

CN is the most dynamic and dominant player playing in the toughest conference. She plays the game at a different level than everyone else. That is obvious. She is also an elite draw specialist - perhaps the best in the country. Scane is a great offensive talent as well but its hard to say that she is not stat padding at all when she shoots 13 times per game and the average margin of victory for NW this year is 10 goals. Their games are pretty much over in the first 15 minutes of each game.

North has been shut down multiple times this year ,Scane and Ortega have not. If you dont think her over the top celebrations will impact the tewaaraton selection committee you are wrong. Is she the flashiest player in the country yes , does taking essentially every draw even in blowout wins help her chances yes.For a player who has the ball in her stick as much as she does the lack of assists is noticeable. I hope a defender gets the award but unlikely.

Stop being jealous. She is amazing and it will be between her and Scane. Ortega a distant 3rd

Originally Posted by Anonymous

People on this thread are funny. Team record doesn’t matter. Player stats don’t matter. It’s “well I watch games” and then some whining diatribe about “the conference is the best” or “teammates don’t like the player”. Sorry.... record and stats matter. If they didn’t why play the games. I get that people have an agenda but the excuses never stop.

I guess that you would agree with the rankings below...

A teams record is absolutely a very good indicator of how teams compare.

4/19/21 - Top 30

1 - North Carolina: 14 - 0

2 - Northwestern: 11 - 0

3 - Stanford: 8 - 0

4 - Jacksonville: 6 - 0

5 - Boston College: 11 - 1

6 - Syracuse: 11 - 1

7 - Drexel: 10 - 1

8 - Denver: 10 - 1

9 - Fairfield: 8 - 1

10 - Richmond: 8 - 1

11 - Elon: 8 - 1

12 - Mt. St Mary's: 11 - 2

13 - UMass: 11 - 2

14 - Florida: 11 - 2

15 - Robert Morris: 10 - 2

16 - Davidson: 10 - 2

17 - LIU: 9 - 2

18 - Loyola: 8 - 2

19 - Monmouth: 7 - 2

20 - Stony Brook: 7 - 2

21 - Siena: 6 - 2

22 - Temple: 10 - 3

23 - Furman: 9 - 3

24 - Lehigh: 6 - 3

25 - Navy: 6 - 3

26 - Niagra: 5 - 3

27 - Duquesne: 4 - 3

28 - Vanderbilt: 11 - 4

29 - Arizona St: 8 - 4

30 - Towson: 8 - 4

Obviously we will see in a few weeks. That’s why they PLAY the tournament games. Until then speculation is fun but still just speculation.

I don’t think they are speculating, I believe they are making the point that a teams record is not necessarily a very good barometer for ranking teams.

If the season were to end today how would the tournament look?

16 Automatic Bids

1 - AAC - Florida
2 - ACC - North Carolina
3 - AE - Stony Brook
4 - ASUN - Jacksonville
5 - A-10 - UMass
6 - Big E - Denver
7 - Big So - High Point
8 - B1G - Northwestern
9 - CAA - Drexel
10 - MAAC - Fairfield
11 - MAC - Robert Morris
12 - MPSF - UC Davis
13 - NEC - Mount St Marry's
14 - PAC12 - Stanford
15 - Patriot - Loyola
16 - SoCon - Furman

13 At Large Bids

1 - Boston College - ACC 11 - 1
2 - Syracuse - ACC 11 - 1
3 - Richmond - A10 8 - 1
4 - Elon - CAA 8 - 1
5 - Mount St Mary - NEC 10 - 2
6 - Davidson - A10 10 - 2
7 - LIU - NEC 9 - 2
8 - Monmouth - MAAC 7 - 2
9 - Siena - MAAC 6 - 2
10 - Temple - AAC 10 - 3
11 - Lehigh - Patriot 6 - 3
12 - Navy - Patriot 6 - 3
13 - Niagara - MAAC 5 - 3

Four teams from the MAAC...they shouldn't get one

Originally Posted by Anonymous

People on this thread are funny. Team record doesn’t matter. Player stats don’t matter. It’s “well I watch games” and then some whining diatribe about “the conference is the best” or “teammates don’t like the player”. Sorry.... record and stats matter. If they didn’t why play the games. I get that people have an agenda but the excuses never stop.

I guess that you would agree with the rankings below...

A teams record is absolutely a very good indicator of how teams compare.

4/19/21 - Top 30

1 - North Carolina: 14 - 0

2 - Northwestern: 11 - 0

3 - Stanford: 8 - 0

4 - Jacksonville: 6 - 0

5 - Boston College: 11 - 1

6 - Syracuse: 11 - 1

7 - Drexel: 10 - 1

8 - Denver: 10 - 1

9 - Fairfield: 8 - 1

10 - Richmond: 8 - 1

11 - Elon: 8 - 1

12 - Mt. St Mary's: 11 - 2

13 - UMass: 11 - 2

14 - Florida: 11 - 2

15 - Robert Morris: 10 - 2

16 - Davidson: 10 - 2

17 - LIU: 9 - 2

18 - Loyola: 8 - 2

19 - Monmouth: 7 - 2

20 - Stony Brook: 7 - 2

21 - Siena: 6 - 2

22 - Temple: 10 - 3

23 - Furman: 9 - 3

24 - Lehigh: 6 - 3

25 - Navy: 6 - 3

26 - Niagra: 5 - 3

27 - Duquesne: 4 - 3

28 - Vanderbilt: 11 - 4

29 - Arizona St: 8 - 4

30 - Towson: 8 - 4

Obviously we will see in a few weeks. That’s why they PLAY the tournament games. Until then speculation is fun but still just speculation.

I don’t think they are speculating, I believe they are making the point that a teams record is not necessarily a very good barometer for ranking teams.

If the season were to end today how would the tournament look?

16 Automatic Bids

1 - AAC - Florida
2 - ACC - North Carolina
3 - AE - Stony Brook
4 - ASUN - Jacksonville
5 - A-10 - UMass
6 - Big E - Denver
7 - Big So - High Point
8 - B1G - Northwestern
9 - CAA - Drexel
10 - MAAC - Fairfield
11 - MAC - Robert Morris
12 - MPSF - UC Davis
13 - NEC - Mount St Marry's
14 - PAC12 - Stanford
15 - Patriot - Loyola
16 - SoCon - Furman

13 At Large Bids

1 - Boston College - ACC 11 - 1
2 - Syracuse - ACC 11 - 1
3 - Richmond - A10 8 - 1
4 - Elon - CAA 8 - 1
5 - Mount St Mary - NEC 10 - 2
6 - Davidson - A10 10 - 2
7 - LIU - NEC 9 - 2
8 - Monmouth - MAAC 7 - 2
9 - Siena - MAAC 6 - 2
10 - Temple - AAC 10 - 3
11 - Lehigh - Patriot 6 - 3
12 - Navy - Patriot 6 - 3
13 - Niagara - MAAC 5 - 3

Four teams from the MAAC...they shouldn't get one

Record, Record, Record.... own it!

LIU, seriously. Look who they played

you are embarrassing yourself with the record argument. apples to oranges

Originally Posted by Anonymous

LIU, seriously. Look who they played

According to some on this site it doesn’t matter who you play. It’s all about your record.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

you are embarrassing yourself with the record argument. apples to oranges

They are trying to prove their point that records do not matter by showing some ridiculous at large bids from traditionally weaker conferences. Listen we know that there are numerous conferences that are very weak. They are lucky to even get an automatic berth and will more than likely be beat by double digits. No one ever said teams like Niagara, Siena and Monmouth are better than your Big 10 teams you hold in such high regard. However there are teams that many believe should be ranked versus some of the Big 10 teams that are below .500 and only play in conference this year. The IL media poll is a little better this week as Maryland is 15, Hopkins is 16. Rutgers at 19 is a little sketchy. But again, the playoffs will be the final answer to these questions. The big concern for the Big 10 is will these teams be invited.

From your list above you may be able to add 2-3 more ACC teams with at large berths based upon their overall record, not just their in conference records (perhaps Duke, ND, Va). I personally think the CAA has some teams that could compete with all the Big 10 teams except of course Northwestern. Could Hofstra beat Hopkins again like last year? I think they can, they have 5 losses but 4 of them are Drexel (2X), Stony Brook and Boston College. Could a Temple beat a Rutgers team? I think they can, they have 3 losses all year to Drexel and Florida (2X). Your point is well taken and expressed more times that we care to read...we will see at the end.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

LIU, seriously. Look who they played

They aren't done playing - they play wagner this week, so most likely will get knocked out

Originally Posted by Anonymous

CN is the most dynamic and dominant player playing in the toughest conference. She plays the game at a different level than everyone else. That is obvious. She is also an elite draw specialist - perhaps the best in the country. Scane is a great offensive talent as well but its hard to say that she is not stat padding at all when she shoots 13 times per game and the average margin of victory for NW this year is 10 goals. Their games are pretty much over in the first 15 minutes of each game.

North has been shut down multiple times this year ,Scane and Ortega have not. If you dont think her over the top celebrations will impact the tewaaraton selection committee you are wrong. Is she the flashiest player in the country yes , does taking essentially every draw even in blowout wins help her chances yes.For a player who has the ball in her stick as much as she does the lack of assists is noticeable. I hope a defender gets the award but unlikely.

Cuse vs BC this week, should be good

Originally Posted by Anonymous

you are embarrassing yourself with the record argument. apples to oranges

They are trying to prove their point that records do not matter by showing some ridiculous at large bids from traditionally weaker conferences. Listen we know that there are numerous conferences that are very weak. They are lucky to even get an automatic berth and will more than likely be beat by double digits. No one ever said teams like Niagara, Siena and Monmouth are better than your Big 10 teams you hold in such high regard. However there are teams that many believe should be ranked versus some of the Big 10 teams that are below .500 and only play in conference this year. The IL media poll is a little better this week as Maryland is 15, Hopkins is 16. Rutgers at 19 is a little sketchy. But again, the playoffs will be the final answer to these questions. The big concern for the Big 10 is will these teams be invited.

From your list above you may be able to add 2-3 more ACC teams with at large berths based upon their overall record, not just their in conference records (perhaps Duke, ND, Va). I personally think the CAA has some teams that could compete with all the Big 10 teams except of course Northwestern. Could Hofstra beat Hopkins again like last year? I think they can, they have 5 losses but 4 of them are Drexel (2X), Stony Brook and Boston College. Could a Temple beat a Rutgers team? I think they can, they have 3 losses all year to Drexel and Florida (2X). Your point is well taken and expressed more times that we care to read...we will see at the end.

Why even bring up “below .500” ? It’s irrelevant with regard to comparing teams. There have been 3 illustrations on here (unc record vs Jacksonville record, the top 30 based on record and the at large bid based on record) all make it very clear how absurd it is to compare teams base on record. Why bring up Duke and ND? Have you looked at their out of conference schedules? They are a complete Joke.

You or some obviously have a problem with the Big 10 and want to use a teams record to judge the Big 10 teams.

Sorry, you can’t have it both ways.

Anyone who knows anything about this sport knows that The Big 10 is one of the toughest leagues around, always one of the top two conferences. This year is no different.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

you are embarrassing yourself with the record argument. apples to oranges

They are trying to prove their point that records do not matter by showing some ridiculous at large bids from traditionally weaker conferences. Listen we know that there are numerous conferences that are very weak. They are lucky to even get an automatic berth and will more than likely be beat by double digits. No one ever said teams like Niagara, Siena and Monmouth are better than your Big 10 teams you hold in such high regard. However there are teams that many believe should be ranked versus some of the Big 10 teams that are below .500 and only play in conference this year. The IL media poll is a little better this week as Maryland is 15, Hopkins is 16. Rutgers at 19 is a little sketchy. But again, the playoffs will be the final answer to these questions. The big concern for the Big 10 is will these teams be invited.

From your list above you may be able to add 2-3 more ACC teams with at large berths based upon their overall record, not just their in conference records (perhaps Duke, ND, Va). I personally think the CAA has some teams that could compete with all the Big 10 teams except of course Northwestern. Could Hofstra beat Hopkins again like last year? I think they can, they have 5 losses but 4 of them are Drexel (2X), Stony Brook and Boston College. Could a Temple beat a Rutgers team? I think they can, they have 3 losses all year to Drexel and Florida (2X). Your point is well taken and expressed more times that we care to read...we will see at the end.

Please do not bring up Notre Dame or Duke, they have become a Joke in recent years with their Out of Conference Schedules. Although this year Virginia has a very weak Out of Conference Schedule I believe that they usually challenge themselves out of conference.

Go compare Out of Conference schedules over the past several years for Penn State and Hopkins Vs Notre Dame and Duke.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

you are embarrassing yourself with the record argument. apples to oranges

They are trying to prove their point that records do not matter by showing some ridiculous at large bids from traditionally weaker conferences. Listen we know that there are numerous conferences that are very weak. They are lucky to even get an automatic berth and will more than likely be beat by double digits. No one ever said teams like Niagara, Siena and Monmouth are better than your Big 10 teams you hold in such high regard. However there are teams that many believe should be ranked versus some of the Big 10 teams that are below .500 and only play in conference this year. The IL media poll is a little better this week as Maryland is 15, Hopkins is 16. Rutgers at 19 is a little sketchy. But again, the playoffs will be the final answer to these questions. The big concern for the Big 10 is will these teams be invited.

From your list above you may be able to add 2-3 more ACC teams with at large berths based upon their overall record, not just their in conference records (perhaps Duke, ND, Va). I personally think the CAA has some teams that could compete with all the Big 10 teams except of course Northwestern. Could Hofstra beat Hopkins again like last year? I think they can, they have 5 losses but 4 of them are Drexel (2X), Stony Brook and Boston College. Could a Temple beat a Rutgers team? I think they can, they have 3 losses all year to Drexel and Florida (2X). Your point is well taken and expressed more times that we care to read...we will see at the end.

There are many on this site, we have all read their posts, they are the people who tear others down others in an effort to elevate themselves (or their daughter, daughters team, daughters conference etc...).

Anyone trying to knock the Big 10 is doing just that.

Traditionally the Top 4 teams in both The Big 10 and the ACC are very competitive with each other. The Big 10 has 7 Teams The ACC has 8 Teams. There are usually 4 Top 20 caliber Big 10 and there are usually 5 Top 20 Caliber ACC teams. Not a big difference but some on here want to knock the Big 10.

Coaches Poll: 4/19/21

You can put 5 through 25 in any order that you want.... No justification at all

1 - North Carolina

2 - Northwestern

3 - Syracuse

4 - Boston College

****************************************

5 - Notre Dame

6 - Stony Brook

7 - Virginia

8 - Duke

9 - Florida

10 - Loyola Maryland

11 - Jacksonville

12 - Drexel

13 - Stanford

14 - Maryland

15 - Johns Hopkins

16 - Rutgers

17 - Denver

18 - Penn State

19 - Louisville

20 - Towson

21 - Richmond

22 - Ohio State

23 - Michigan

24 - Massachusetts

25 - James Madison

Cuse-BC college game was a good one.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Cuse-BC college game was a good one.

Looking forward to their next meeting, it should be another good one. UNC, BC and Syracuse have clearly separated themselves from the rest of the ACC. ND was clearly over hyped again, Virginia and Duke are probably not Top 10, Louisville borderline Top 20 and Va Tech having a tough year.

SB coming off a three week Covid break with no practices. Albany will beat them today Go Danes

Originally Posted by Anonymous

SB coming off a three week Covid break with no practices. Albany will beat them today Go Danes

That is how they beat Hofstra but I think SBU is a little stronger than Hofstra. I think SBU finds a way to win.

Most dominant player , I don’t think so .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Most dominant player , I don’t think so .

Slither back under your rock.

The BC - Cuse game was a good one yesterday. It was good to see Cuse regroup after another top player went down on Thursday. Both teams have very good players and lots of LI girls. Good luck to both teams as they move forward to the ACC tournament.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Most dominant player , I don’t think so .

Slither back under your rock.

“Different level than everyone else “

Certainly a different level than anyone on the winning team .

Division 3 Tufts, a very good team, dominates Dartmouth in what was Dartmouth’s first game of the year. COVID has created some interesting match ups.

ACC 3 team conference this year. ND just can’t get it together again. Why were they overhyped again this year? Surprised by Virginia this year, although it’s been a while since they were a final four caliber team they are usually more competitive. Duke just can’t seem to get back to where they were “consistently Top 10” it’s been more than a few years now. Va Tech and Louisville are what they are... very solid programs in a very tough conference... IDK what they should do, play some tough Out of conference games or follow ND and Duke and not challenge themselves out of conference.

Please , always same thing with ND. They always have excuses. Was Duke ever really a top 10 team?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

ACC 3 team conference this year. ND just can’t get it together again. Why were they overhyped again this year? Surprised by Virginia this year, although it’s been a while since they were a final four caliber team they are usually more competitive. Duke just can’t seem to get back to where they were “consistently Top 10” it’s been more than a few years now. Va Tech and Louisville are what they are... very solid programs in a very tough conference... IDK what they should do, play some tough Out of conference games or follow ND and Duke and not challenge themselves out of conference.

Your post is truly uninformed . If the ACC is a 3 team conference then the big 10 is a 1 team conference and all other conferences are a zero team conference . Please tell us the teams that would do better than Duke , ND , UVA if they were in the ACC . Both Duke and ND gave UNC all they could handle and if you watched UVA vs Cuse or vs BC on Wednesday you would definitely say competitive . As far as Va Tech they have been hurt by COVID and injury this year but seem to have gotten it together at the end of the year . The final four could easily be an all ACC battle if the NCAA were to separate the teams but they will not as they want parity . If Louisville or Va tech were to make the tournament there are many teams from other conferences they would beat . The ACC is stacked this year and playing some of these teams 2x then again in the tournament is brutal .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

ACC 3 team conference this year. ND just can’t get it together again. Why were they overhyped again this year? Surprised by Virginia this year, although it’s been a while since they were a final four caliber team they are usually more competitive. Duke just can’t seem to get back to where they were “consistently Top 10” it’s been more than a few years now. Va Tech and Louisville are what they are... very solid programs in a very tough conference... IDK what they should do, play some tough Out of conference games or follow ND and Duke and not challenge themselves out of conference.

Your post is truly uninformed . If the ACC is a 3 team conference then the big 10 is a 1 team conference and all other conferences are a zero team conference . Please tell us the teams that would do better than Duke , ND , UVA if they were in the ACC . Both Duke and ND gave UNC all they could handle and if you watched UVA vs Cuse or vs BC on Wednesday you would definitely say competitive . As far as Va Tech they have been hurt by COVID and injury this year but seem to have gotten it together at the end of the year . The final four could easily be an all ACC battle if the NCAA were to separate the teams but they will not as they want parity . If Louisville or Va tech were to make the tournament there are many teams from other conferences they would beat . The ACC is stacked this year and playing some of these teams 2x then again in the tournament is brutal .

Bla bla bla.... same song all the time.... if the queen had you know what she would be king.... this year the same as every year several teams are stronger than several ACC teams. When was the last time we saw an all ACC final four? Give it a rest already.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

ACC 3 team conference this year. ND just can’t get it together again. Why were they overhyped again this year? Surprised by Virginia this year, although it’s been a while since they were a final four caliber team they are usually more competitive. Duke just can’t seem to get back to where they were “consistently Top 10” it’s been more than a few years now. Va Tech and Louisville are what they are... very solid programs in a very tough conference... IDK what they should do, play some tough Out of conference games or follow ND and Duke and not challenge themselves out of conference.

Your post is truly uninformed . If the ACC is a 3 team conference then the big 10 is a 1 team conference and all other conferences are a zero team conference . Please tell us the teams that would do better than Duke , ND , UVA if they were in the ACC . Both Duke and ND gave UNC all they could handle and if you watched UVA vs Cuse or vs BC on Wednesday you would definitely say competitive . As far as Va Tech they have been hurt by COVID and injury this year but seem to have gotten it together at the end of the year . The final four could easily be an all ACC battle if the NCAA were to separate the teams but they will not as they want parity . If Louisville or Va tech were to make the tournament there are many teams from other conferences they would beat . The ACC is stacked this year and playing some of these teams 2x then again in the tournament is brutal .

Bla bla bla.... same song all the time.... if the queen had you know what she would be king.... this year the same as every year several teams are stronger than several ACC teams. When was the last time we saw an all ACC final four? Give it a rest already.

And yet you will not name any team because you are sadly uninformed . I will make it easy for you , what team other than NW would be competitive in the ACC . The reason you will not see an all ACC final four is because the NCAA committee will
have them play each other . You can be the dope who has no clue or give us some other teams , how did DBU do against ACC and they are the next best after NW other than ACC teams

Originally Posted by Anonymous

ACC 3 team conference this year. ND just can’t get it together again. Why were they overhyped again this year? Surprised by Virginia this year, although it’s been a while since they were a final four caliber team they are usually more competitive. Duke just can’t seem to get back to where they were “consistently Top 10” it’s been more than a few years now. Va Tech and Louisville are what they are... very solid programs in a very tough conference... IDK what they should do, play some tough Out of conference games or follow ND and Duke and not challenge themselves out of conference.

Your post is truly uninformed . If the ACC is a 3 team conference then the big 10 is a 1 team conference and all other conferences are a zero team conference . Please tell us the teams that would do better than Duke , ND , UVA if they were in the ACC . Both Duke and ND gave UNC all they could handle and if you watched UVA vs Cuse or vs BC on Wednesday you would definitely say competitive . As far as Va Tech they have been hurt by COVID and injury this year but seem to have gotten it together at the end of the year . The final four could easily be an all ACC battle if the NCAA were to separate the teams but they will not as they want parity . If Louisville or Va tech were to make the tournament there are many teams from other conferences they would beat . The ACC is stacked this year and playing some of these teams 2x then again in the tournament is brutal .

Bla bla bla.... same song all the time.... if the queen had you know what she would be king.... this year the same as every year several teams are stronger than several ACC teams. When was the last time we saw an all ACC final four? Give it a rest already.

And yet you will not name any team because you are sadly uninformed . I will make it easy for you , what team other than NW would be competitive in the ACC . The reason you will not see an all ACC final four is because the NCAA committee will
have them play each other . You can be the dope who has no clue or give us some other teams , how did DBU do against ACC and they are the next best after NW other than ACC teams

After UNC and BC what has any ACC team done in the past 5 full seasons of play 2016 - 2019? You pound your chest as if the entire ACC is on par with North Carolina, they are not... not even close.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

ACC 3 team conference this year. ND just can’t get it together again. Why were they overhyped again this year? Surprised by Virginia this year, although it’s been a while since they were a final four caliber team they are usually more competitive. Duke just can’t seem to get back to where they were “consistently Top 10” it’s been more than a few years now. Va Tech and Louisville are what they are... very solid programs in a very tough conference... IDK what they should do, play some tough Out of conference games or follow ND and Duke and not challenge themselves out of conference.

Your post is truly uninformed . If the ACC is a 3 team conference then the big 10 is a 1 team conference and all other conferences are a zero team conference . Please tell us the teams that would do better than Duke , ND , UVA if they were in the ACC . Both Duke and ND gave UNC all they could handle and if you watched UVA vs Cuse or vs BC on Wednesday you would definitely say competitive . As far as Va Tech they have been hurt by COVID and injury this year but seem to have gotten it together at the end of the year . The final four could easily be an all ACC battle if the NCAA were to separate the teams but they will not as they want parity . If Louisville or Va tech were to make the tournament there are many teams from other conferences they would beat . The ACC is stacked this year and playing some of these teams 2x then again in the tournament is brutal .

Bla bla bla.... same song all the time.... if the queen had you know what she would be king.... this year the same as every year several teams are stronger than several ACC teams. When was the last time we saw an all ACC final four? Give it a rest already.

And yet you will not name any team because you are sadly uninformed . I will make it easy for you , what team other than NW would be competitive in the ACC . The reason you will not see an all ACC final four is because the NCAA committee will
have them play each other . You can be the dope who has no clue or give us some other teams , how did DBU do against ACC and they are the next best after NW other than ACC teams

I would say there are many teams that would be just as competitive in The ACC as ND, Duke, UVA, Va Tech, And Louisville. Just looked at 2016 - 2019... for ND, Duke, UVA and Syracuse here are their Non-Conference Losses:

Notre Dame - Northwestern 5x, USC 2x, High Point, Albany, Princeton, Towson, Cornell.

Duke - Northwestern 3x, Penn 2x, Stanford 2x, Penn State, High Point, USC, Elon, Georgetown.

UVA - Maryland 4x, Penn State 2x, Princeton 2x, Loyola 2x, JMU 2x, Elon , Navy, Hopkins.

Syracuse - Maryland 5x, Princeton 2x, Northwestern 2x, Florida 2x.

I will give Syracuse and Virginia credit because the do play competitive non-conference schedules but ND and Duke have become a bit of a joke with their non-conference schedules.

Plenty of Programs would be Just as competitive as 5 or 6 of the ACC teams on any given year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

ACC 3 team conference this year. ND just can’t get it together again. Why were they overhyped again this year? Surprised by Virginia this year, although it’s been a while since they were a final four caliber team they are usually more competitive. Duke just can’t seem to get back to where they were “consistently Top 10” it’s been more than a few years now. Va Tech and Louisville are what they are... very solid programs in a very tough conference... IDK what they should do, play some tough Out of conference games or follow ND and Duke and not challenge themselves out of conference.

Your post is truly uninformed . If the ACC is a 3 team conference then the big 10 is a 1 team conference and all other conferences are a zero team conference . Please tell us the teams that would do better than Duke , ND , UVA if they were in the ACC . Both Duke and ND gave UNC all they could handle and if you watched UVA vs Cuse or vs BC on Wednesday you would definitely say competitive . As far as Va Tech they have been hurt by COVID and injury this year but seem to have gotten it together at the end of the year . The final four could easily be an all ACC battle if the NCAA were to separate the teams but they will not as they want parity . If Louisville or Va tech were to make the tournament there are many teams from other conferences they would beat . The ACC is stacked this year and playing some of these teams 2x then again in the tournament is brutal .

Bla bla bla.... same song all the time.... if the queen had you know what she would be king.... this year the same as every year several teams are stronger than several ACC teams. When was the last time we saw an all ACC final four? Give it a rest already.

And yet you will not name any team because you are sadly uninformed . I will make it easy for you , what team other than NW would be competitive in the ACC . The reason you will not see an all ACC final four is because the NCAA committee will
have them play each other . You can be the dope who has no clue or give us some other teams , how did DBU do against ACC and they are the next best after NW other than ACC teams

I would say there are many teams that would be just as competitive in The ACC as ND, Duke, UVA, Va Tech, And Louisville. Just looked at 2016 - 2019... for ND, Duke, UVA and Syracuse here are their Non-Conference Losses:

Notre Dame - Northwestern 5x, USC 2x, High Point, Albany, Princeton, Towson, Cornell.

Duke - Northwestern 3x, Penn 2x, Stanford 2x, Penn State, High Point, USC, Elon, Georgetown.

UVA - Maryland 4x, Penn State 2x, Princeton 2x, Loyola 2x, JMU 2x, Elon , Navy, Hopkins.

Syracuse - Maryland 5x, Princeton 2x, Northwestern 2x, Florida 2x.

I will give Syracuse and Virginia credit because the do play competitive non-conference schedules but ND and Duke have become a bit of a joke with their non-conference schedules.

Plenty of Programs would be Just as competitive as 5 or 6 of the ACC teams on any given year.

Exactly. Even UNC has lost non-conference games in recent years to Maryland, Florida, James Madison, Navy. BC has lost to UMass, USC, Maryland, James Madison in past 5 seasons. ACC is usually strongest overall conference and may have 3 of the top 4 teams this year, but there are certainly other programs that would be competitive in the ACC. As for Covid impact and injuries mentioned by a previous poster - plenty of teams have faced the same setbacks but a few programs like VT are very vocal using it as an excuse.

Wow , some know it all says the ACC is a 3 team conference this year and he gets challenged to name another school other than NW that would be more competitive than the other schools if they were in the ACC and not one of you even try . They are talking about this year as in “the ACC is stacked this year “. Sorry but the ACC fan is right in terms of this year , I cannot name another team that would be more competitive than UVA , Duke , ND if they were in the ACC . Maybe a few over Louisville and Va Tech but not even sure about that . They are not talking about past years or historical program strength just this season . Watching UNC play ND on Friday just showed me that no one will beat UNC if UNC plays near their best and really can’t judge ND based on that one .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow , some know it all says the ACC is a 3 team conference this year and he gets challenged to name another school other than NW that would be more competitive than the other schools if they were in the ACC and not one of you even try . They are talking about this year as in “the ACC is stacked this year “. Sorry but the ACC fan is right in terms of this year , I cannot name another team that would be more competitive than UVA , Duke , ND if they were in the ACC . Maybe a few over Louisville and Va Tech but not even sure about that . They are not talking about past years or historical program strength just this season . Watching UNC play ND on Friday just showed me that no one will beat UNC if UNC plays near their best and really can’t judge ND based on that one .

Only "maybe a few" teams this year would be over Louisville or Va Tech...LOL. Not worth listing teams and further debating this opinion.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow , some know it all says the ACC is a 3 team conference this year and he gets challenged to name another school other than NW that would be more competitive than the other schools if they were in the ACC and not one of you even try . They are talking about this year as in “the ACC is stacked this year “. Sorry but the ACC fan is right in terms of this year , I cannot name another team that would be more competitive than UVA , Duke , ND if they were in the ACC . Maybe a few over Louisville and Va Tech but not even sure about that . They are not talking about past years or historical program strength just this season . Watching UNC play ND on Friday just showed me that no one will beat UNC if UNC plays near their best and really can’t judge ND based on that one .

Only "maybe a few" teams this year would be over Louisville or Va Tech...LOL. Not worth listing teams and further debating this opinion.

I agree, we should just listen to the blow hard who touts the ACC as the super conference.... we should all just forget about reality. We must believe No teams can compete with the ACC ... the ACC parent told us the ACC is the best and no team can compete ...
I do not know why there is a season this year... just have Louisville play Virginia Tech for the National championship... Historical data proves nothing, the best teams are all ACC...
But please make sure to put your mask on when you watch the game from your living room....

I guess the two biggest conferences couldn’t get together and schedule their tournament championships at different times?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow , some know it all says the ACC is a 3 team conference this year and he gets challenged to name another school other than NW that would be more competitive than the other schools if they were in the ACC and not one of you even try . They are talking about this year as in “the ACC is stacked this year “. Sorry but the ACC fan is right in terms of this year , I cannot name another team that would be more competitive than UVA , Duke , ND if they were in the ACC . Maybe a few over Louisville and Va Tech but not even sure about that . They are not talking about past years or historical program strength just this season . Watching UNC play ND on Friday just showed me that no one will beat UNC if UNC plays near their best and really can’t judge ND based on that one .

Only "maybe a few" teams this year would be over Louisville or Va Tech...LOL. Not worth listing teams and further debating this opinion.

I agree, we should just listen to the blow hard who touts the ACC as the super conference.... we should all just forget about reality. We must believe No teams can compete with the ACC ... the ACC parent told us the ACC is the best and no team can compete ...
I do not know why there is a season this year... just have Louisville play Virginia Tech for the National championship... Historical data proves nothing, the best teams are all ACC...
But please make sure to put your mask on when you watch the game from your living room....

Well.... at least it’s not the big 10 nonsense. These are people who read IL to get their lax information.

Amazing , give us the team that would be more competitive than ND , Duke , UVA in the ACC . None of you will name a team because you know how foolish you will look . Besides NW just name one team , still waiting . I guarantee the team your kid plays on would get buried in the ACC . Just for you I will start naming the champs of each conference as they happen and we will do a short comparison of their reality if they were in the ACC this year .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Amazing , give us the team that would be more competitive than ND , Duke , UVA in the ACC . None of you will name a team because you know how foolish you will look . Besides NW just name one team , still waiting . I guarantee the team your kid plays on would get buried in the ACC . Just for you I will start naming the champs of each conference as they happen and we will do a short comparison of their reality if they were in the ACC this year .

Where is the big 10 guy. Cmon man. Get in on this. Then you two can provide some entertainment for us. Although it’s all kinda bs as the tourney starts in few weeks.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Amazing , give us the team that would be more competitive than ND , Duke , UVA in the ACC . None of you will name a team because you know how foolish you will look . Besides NW just name one team , still waiting . I guarantee the team your kid plays on would get buried in the ACC . Just for you I will start naming the champs of each conference as they happen and we will do a short comparison of their reality if they were in the ACC this year .

Where is the big 10 guy. Cmon man. Get in on this. Then you two can provide some entertainment for us. Although it’s all kinda bs as the tourney starts in few weeks.

Still no team ??

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Amazing , give us the team that would be more competitive than ND , Duke , UVA in the ACC . None of you will name a team because you know how foolish you will look . Besides NW just name one team , still waiting . I guarantee the team your kid plays on would get buried in the ACC . Just for you I will start naming the champs of each conference as they happen and we will do a short comparison of their reality if they were in the ACC this year .

Where is the big 10 guy. Cmon man. Get in on this. Then you two can provide some entertainment for us. Although it’s all kinda bs as the tourney starts in few weeks.

Still no team ??

I would say that this year is no different than other years, the top 2 - 3 Teams in the ACC are excellent, after that there are a bunch of teams that are as competitive as ND, Duke and UVA. Northwestern, Maryland, Rutgers, Hopkins... Florida, Stony Brook, Loyola, Drexel, Stanford etc... If the Ivy’s were playing I would throw in Princeton and Penn as well.

D3 bracket has been announced.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Amazing , give us the team that would be more competitive than ND , Duke , UVA in the ACC . None of you will name a team because you know how foolish you will look . Besides NW just name one team , still waiting . I guarantee the team your kid plays on would get buried in the ACC . Just for you I will start naming the champs of each conference as they happen and we will do a short comparison of their reality if they were in the ACC this year .

Where is the big 10 guy. Cmon man. Get in on this. Then you two can provide some entertainment for us. Although it’s all kinda bs as the tourney starts in few weeks.

Still no team ??

I would say that this year is no different than other years, the top 2 - 3 Teams in the ACC are excellent, after that there are a bunch of teams that are as competitive as ND, Duke and UVA. Northwestern, Maryland, Rutgers, Hopkins... Florida, Stony Brook, Loyola, Drexel, Stanford etc... If the Ivy’s were playing I would throw in Princeton and Penn as well.

The question was more competitive but I do agree many of those teams would be as competitive . I think Rutgers and Hopkins are a step below and you did not give NW enough credit as they would have been in the mix to win the ACC.

Florida
Denver
UMASS
Drexel

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Amazing , give us the team that would be more competitive than ND , Duke , UVA in the ACC . None of you will name a team because you know how foolish you will look . Besides NW just name one team , still waiting . I guarantee the team your kid plays on would get buried in the ACC . Just for you I will start naming the champs of each conference as they happen and we will do a short comparison of their reality if they were in the ACC this year .

Where is the big 10 guy. Cmon man. Get in on this. Then you two can provide some entertainment for us. Although it’s all kinda bs as the tourney starts in few weeks.

Still no team ??

I would say that this year is no different than other years, the top 2 - 3 Teams in the ACC are excellent, after that there are a bunch of teams that are as competitive as ND, Duke and UVA. Northwestern, Maryland, Rutgers, Hopkins... Florida, Stony Brook, Loyola, Drexel, Stanford etc... If the Ivy’s were playing I would throw in Princeton and Penn as well.

The question was more competitive but I do agree many of those teams would be as competitive . I think Rutgers and Hopkins are a step below and you did not give NW enough credit as they would have been in the mix to win the ACC.

IMHO I do not see NW being in the mix to win ACC. UNC, Syracuse and BC have prolific offenses adn NW has a spotty defense to say the least. I watched a decent Rutgers team put 14 on the board with 20+ turnovers. Those three ACC teams could put 20+ on the scoreboard against NW. NW has a prolific offense as well, however they have not faced defenses like the three ACC teams. I think that is the difference.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Florida
Denver
UMASS
Drexel

At least you named some teams but I don't think this years results would indicate that any of them would be more competitive in the ACC than any of the ACC teams.
UMASS Every team in the ACC except Va Tech played a more competitive game against their only common opponent BC and they have not beaten any ranked team seems like a stretch to say they are more competitive than any ACC tournament.
Denver They again have not beaten any ranked team and lost to Colorado who lost to Louisville so so again saying they would be more competitive in the ACC than any ACC team seems to be a stretch
Drexel They lost to the only currently ranked team they played by 5 , that team, Loyola, lost to the only ACC team they played in a completely non competitive game ,while they do have some impressive quality wins not sure that puts them as being more competitive than UVA, ND ,Duke .
Florida This is probably the best resume of the group as they beat Louisville, and played competitive against UNC . The loss to Jacksonville and the fact that their only ranked win is over #20 Louisville seems to indicate that at best they would be equally competitive and that's being generous
In the end they are all good teams but the ACC is just very good this year

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Florida
Denver
UMASS
Drexel

At least you named some teams but I don't think this years results would indicate that any of them would be more competitive in the ACC than any of the ACC teams.
UMASS Every team in the ACC except Va Tech played a more competitive game against their only common opponent BC and they have not beaten any ranked team seems like a stretch to say they are more competitive than any ACC tournament.
Denver They again have not beaten any ranked team and lost to Colorado who lost to Louisville so so again saying they would be more competitive in the ACC than any ACC team seems to be a stretch
Drexel They lost to the only currently ranked team they played by 5 , that team, Loyola, lost to the only ACC team they played in a completely non competitive game ,while they do have some impressive quality wins not sure that puts them as being more competitive than UVA, ND ,Duke .
Florida This is probably the best resume of the group as they beat Louisville, and played competitive against UNC . The loss to Jacksonville and the fact that their only ranked win is over #20 Louisville seems to indicate that at best they would be equally competitive and that's being generous
In the end they are all good teams but the ACC is just very good this year

Maybe they could just call it the NCAACC tournament.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Florida
Denver
UMASS
Drexel

At least you named some teams but I don't think this years results would indicate that any of them would be more competitive in the ACC than any of the ACC teams.
UMASS Every team in the ACC except Va Tech played a more competitive game against their only common opponent BC and they have not beaten any ranked team seems like a stretch to say they are more competitive than any ACC tournament.
Denver They again have not beaten any ranked team and lost to Colorado who lost to Louisville so so again saying they would be more competitive in the ACC than any ACC team seems to be a stretch
Drexel They lost to the only currently ranked team they played by 5 , that team, Loyola, lost to the only ACC team they played in a completely non competitive game ,while they do have some impressive quality wins not sure that puts them as being more competitive than UVA, ND ,Duke .
Florida This is probably the best resume of the group as they beat Louisville, and played competitive against UNC . The loss to Jacksonville and the fact that their only ranked win is over #20 Louisville seems to indicate that at best they would be equally competitive and that's being generous
In the end they are all good teams but the ACC is just very good this year

Maybe they could just call it the NCAACC tournament.

Comparative scores are never a strong benchmark for comparing teams. Trying to use Top 20 wins or a teams record this year is basically useless. The only true indication of how teams stack up is head to head competition, relative strength of schedule and overall body of work. This year it is all speculation due to the fact that there has been very little out of conference competition between the top programs. In recent years, only North Carolina and Boston College have proven themselves to be a cut above, Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dam are always Top 20, Duke has been a notch below for several years and Va Tech and Louisville are competitive but certainly have never consistently been Top 20. The Reality is that when you look at the DI field there are always a number of teams that are just as competitive as the bottom 5 or 6 ACC teams. There are also always some that are more competitive than ACC Teams. The ACC does have an advantage this year because many other programs will go into the tournament without being battle tested. Teams like Stony Brook, Florida, JMU, Loyola etc... usually play much tougher schedules than they did this year. Is the ACC the Strongest conference? Yes, but on any given year there between 15 - 20 Teams that are as competitive in the ACC as the bottom 5 or 6.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Florida
Denver
UMASS
Drexel

At least you named some teams but I don't think this years results would indicate that any of them would be more competitive in the ACC than any of the ACC teams.
UMASS Every team in the ACC except Va Tech played a more competitive game against their only common opponent BC and they have not beaten any ranked team seems like a stretch to say they are more competitive than any ACC tournament.
Denver They again have not beaten any ranked team and lost to Colorado who lost to Louisville so so again saying they would be more competitive in the ACC than any ACC team seems to be a stretch
Drexel They lost to the only currently ranked team they played by 5 , that team, Loyola, lost to the only ACC team they played in a completely non competitive game ,while they do have some impressive quality wins not sure that puts them as being more competitive than UVA, ND ,Duke .
Florida This is probably the best resume of the group as they beat Louisville, and played competitive against UNC . The loss to Jacksonville and the fact that their only ranked win is over #20 Louisville seems to indicate that at best they would be equally competitive and that's being generous
In the end they are all good teams but the ACC is just very good this year

Maybe they could just call it the NCAACC tournament.

Comparative scores are never a strong benchmark for comparing teams. Trying to use Top 20 wins or a teams record this year is basically useless. The only true indication of how teams stack up is head to head competition, relative strength of schedule and overall body of work. This year it is all speculation due to the fact that there has been very little out of conference competition between the top programs. In recent years, only North Carolina and Boston College have proven themselves to be a cut above, Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dam are always Top 20, Duke has been a notch below for several years and Va Tech and Louisville are competitive but certainly have never consistently been Top 20. The Reality is that when you look at the DI field there are always a number of teams that are just as competitive as the bottom 5 or 6 ACC teams. There are also always some that are more competitive than ACC Teams. The ACC does have an advantage this year because many other programs will go into the tournament without being battle tested. Teams like Stony Brook, Florida, JMU, Loyola etc... usually play much tougher schedules than they did this year. Is the ACC the Strongest conference? Yes, but on any given year there between 15 - 20 Teams that are as competitive in the ACC as the bottom 5 or 6.

Complete drivel. You don't want to use comparative scores to predict how competitive a team would be nor do you want to use how teams did against top 20 teams instead you want to use strength of schedule which has nothing to do with how good a team is. Talking about how teams have done 3 years ago and more has nothing to do with a current team just look at Drexel. To say a "number of teams that are just as competitive"...as Syracuse , ND , etc is just not looking at current results and teams. Head to head results are generally the best indicator so look at last years as many of the teams have essentially the same players back. The consensus best non ACC team this year seems to be NW, how did they do while playing ACC teams last year. Included in your bottom 6 ACC teams are Cuse, UVA, ND,Duke who went a combined 21-4 out of conference with 2 wins over NW and 1 over MD,Stanford, Princeton, and Navy to name a few.This year those same teams are 17-0 out of conference with wins over JMU,SBU,Loyola,Richmond . To say there are 15-20 teams that are as competitive as these ACC teams is just nonsense.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Florida
Denver
UMASS
Drexel

At least you named some teams but I don't think this years results would indicate that any of them would be more competitive in the ACC than any of the ACC teams.
UMASS Every team in the ACC except Va Tech played a more competitive game against their only common opponent BC and they have not beaten any ranked team seems like a stretch to say they are more competitive than any ACC tournament.
Denver They again have not beaten any ranked team and lost to Colorado who lost to Louisville so so again saying they would be more competitive in the ACC than any ACC team seems to be a stretch
Drexel They lost to the only currently ranked team they played by 5 , that team, Loyola, lost to the only ACC team they played in a completely non competitive game ,while they do have some impressive quality wins not sure that puts them as being more competitive than UVA, ND ,Duke .
Florida This is probably the best resume of the group as they beat Louisville, and played competitive against UNC . The loss to Jacksonville and the fact that their only ranked win is over #20 Louisville seems to indicate that at best they would be equally competitive and that's being generous
In the end they are all good teams but the ACC is just very good this year

Maybe they could just call it the NCAACC tournament.

Comparative scores are never a strong benchmark for comparing teams. Trying to use Top 20 wins or a teams record this year is basically useless. The only true indication of how teams stack up is head to head competition, relative strength of schedule and overall body of work. This year it is all speculation due to the fact that there has been very little out of conference competition between the top programs. In recent years, only North Carolina and Boston College have proven themselves to be a cut above, Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dam are always Top 20, Duke has been a notch below for several years and Va Tech and Louisville are competitive but certainly have never consistently been Top 20. The Reality is that when you look at the DI field there are always a number of teams that are just as competitive as the bottom 5 or 6 ACC teams. There are also always some that are more competitive than ACC Teams. The ACC does have an advantage this year because many other programs will go into the tournament without being battle tested. Teams like Stony Brook, Florida, JMU, Loyola etc... usually play much tougher schedules than they did this year. Is the ACC the Strongest conference? Yes, but on any given year there between 15 - 20 Teams that are as competitive in the ACC as the bottom 5 or 6.

Complete drivel. You don't want to use comparative scores to predict how competitive a team would be nor do you want to use how teams did against top 20 teams instead you want to use strength of schedule which has nothing to do with how good a team is. Talking about how teams have done 3 years ago and more has nothing to do with a current team just look at Drexel. To say a "number of teams that are just as competitive"...as Syracuse , ND , etc is just not looking at current results and teams. Head to head results are generally the best indicator so look at last years as many of the teams have essentially the same players back. The consensus best non ACC team this year seems to be NW, how did they do while playing ACC teams last year. Included in your bottom 6 ACC teams are Cuse, UVA, ND,Duke who went a combined 21-4 out of conference with 2 wins over NW and 1 over MD,Stanford, Princeton, and Navy to name a few.This year those same teams are 17-0 out of conference with wins over JMU,SBU,Loyola,Richmond . To say there are 15-20 teams that are as competitive as these ACC teams is just nonsense.

This is a joke right. You stated can’t use prior year's results then quote prior-year results. Geez. I’m thinking you just like to read your nonsense.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Florida
Denver
UMASS
Drexel

At least you named some teams but I don't think this years results would indicate that any of them would be more competitive in the ACC than any of the ACC teams.
UMASS Every team in the ACC except Va Tech played a more competitive game against their only common opponent BC and they have not beaten any ranked team seems like a stretch to say they are more competitive than any ACC tournament.
Denver They again have not beaten any ranked team and lost to Colorado who lost to Louisville so so again saying they would be more competitive in the ACC than any ACC team seems to be a stretch
Drexel They lost to the only currently ranked team they played by 5 , that team, Loyola, lost to the only ACC team they played in a completely non competitive game ,while they do have some impressive quality wins not sure that puts them as being more competitive than UVA, ND ,Duke .
Florida This is probably the best resume of the group as they beat Louisville, and played competitive against UNC . The loss to Jacksonville and the fact that their only ranked win is over #20 Louisville seems to indicate that at best they would be equally competitive and that's being generous
In the end they are all good teams but the ACC is just very good this year

Maybe they could just call it the NCAACC tournament.

Comparative scores are never a strong benchmark for comparing teams. Trying to use Top 20 wins or a teams record this year is basically useless. The only true indication of how teams stack up is head to head competition, relative strength of schedule and overall body of work. This year it is all speculation due to the fact that there has been very little out of conference competition between the top programs. In recent years, only North Carolina and Boston College have proven themselves to be a cut above, Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dam are always Top 20, Duke has been a notch below for several years and Va Tech and Louisville are competitive but certainly have never consistently been Top 20. The Reality is that when you look at the DI field there are always a number of teams that are just as competitive as the bottom 5 or 6 ACC teams. There are also always some that are more competitive than ACC Teams. The ACC does have an advantage this year because many other programs will go into the tournament without being battle tested. Teams like Stony Brook, Florida, JMU, Loyola etc... usually play much tougher schedules than they did this year. Is the ACC the Strongest conference? Yes, but on any given year there between 15 - 20 Teams that are as competitive in the ACC as the bottom 5 or 6.

Complete drivel. You don't want to use comparative scores to predict how competitive a team would be nor do you want to use how teams did against top 20 teams instead you want to use strength of schedule which has nothing to do with how good a team is. Talking about how teams have done 3 years ago and more has nothing to do with a current team just look at Drexel. To say a "number of teams that are just as competitive"...as Syracuse , ND , etc is just not looking at current results and teams. Head to head results are generally the best indicator so look at last years as many of the teams have essentially the same players back. The consensus best non ACC team this year seems to be NW, how did they do while playing ACC teams last year. Included in your bottom 6 ACC teams are Cuse, UVA, ND,Duke who went a combined 21-4 out of conference with 2 wins over NW and 1 over MD,Stanford, Princeton, and Navy to name a few.This year those same teams are 17-0 out of conference with wins over JMU,SBU,Loyola,Richmond . To say there are 15-20 teams that are as competitive as these ACC teams is just nonsense.

We get it, you believe all ACC teams would dominate the rest of Division I Women’s Lacrosse teams. That is your opinion, it is not a fact and it has never actually been a reality, who knows maybe this year but in the end you are simply stating your opinion. The reality of actual results for many years shows that on most years there are 2 Final Four Caliber Teams from The ACC. Most on here would agree that after the Top 4 there are probably 15 or so teams that are competitive with each other most years Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dame are in that group. Duke in recent years has been at the bottom of that group.. and Va Tech and Louisville most years are on the outside looking in at that group of teams. Obviously you can have your opinion but the reality of what has actually happened tells a different story. Maybe in this crazy Covid season things will be different.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Florida
Denver
UMASS
Drexel

At least you named some teams but I don't think this years results would indicate that any of them would be more competitive in the ACC than any of the ACC teams.
UMASS Every team in the ACC except Va Tech played a more competitive game against their only common opponent BC and they have not beaten any ranked team seems like a stretch to say they are more competitive than any ACC tournament.
Denver They again have not beaten any ranked team and lost to Colorado who lost to Louisville so so again saying they would be more competitive in the ACC than any ACC team seems to be a stretch
Drexel They lost to the only currently ranked team they played by 5 , that team, Loyola, lost to the only ACC team they played in a completely non competitive game ,while they do have some impressive quality wins not sure that puts them as being more competitive than UVA, ND ,Duke .
Florida This is probably the best resume of the group as they beat Louisville, and played competitive against UNC . The loss to Jacksonville and the fact that their only ranked win is over #20 Louisville seems to indicate that at best they would be equally competitive and that's being generous
In the end they are all good teams but the ACC is just very good this year

Maybe they could just call it the NCAACC tournament.

Comparative scores are never a strong benchmark for comparing teams. Trying to use Top 20 wins or a teams record this year is basically useless. The only true indication of how teams stack up is head to head competition, relative strength of schedule and overall body of work. This year it is all speculation due to the fact that there has been very little out of conference competition between the top programs. In recent years, only North Carolina and Boston College have proven themselves to be a cut above, Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dam are always Top 20, Duke has been a notch below for several years and Va Tech and Louisville are competitive but certainly have never consistently been Top 20. The Reality is that when you look at the DI field there are always a number of teams that are just as competitive as the bottom 5 or 6 ACC teams. There are also always some that are more competitive than ACC Teams. The ACC does have an advantage this year because many other programs will go into the tournament without being battle tested. Teams like Stony Brook, Florida, JMU, Loyola etc... usually play much tougher schedules than they did this year. Is the ACC the Strongest conference? Yes, but on any given year there between 15 - 20 Teams that are as competitive in the ACC as the bottom 5 or 6.

Complete drivel. You don't want to use comparative scores to predict how competitive a team would be nor do you want to use how teams did against top 20 teams instead you want to use strength of schedule which has nothing to do with how good a team is. Talking about how teams have done 3 years ago and more has nothing to do with a current team just look at Drexel. To say a "number of teams that are just as competitive"...as Syracuse , ND , etc is just not looking at current results and teams. Head to head results are generally the best indicator so look at last years as many of the teams have essentially the same players back. The consensus best non ACC team this year seems to be NW, how did they do while playing ACC teams last year. Included in your bottom 6 ACC teams are Cuse, UVA, ND,Duke who went a combined 21-4 out of conference with 2 wins over NW and 1 over MD,Stanford, Princeton, and Navy to name a few.This year those same teams are 17-0 out of conference with wins over JMU,SBU,Loyola,Richmond . To say there are 15-20 teams that are as competitive as these ACC teams is just nonsense.

This is a joke right. You stated can’t use prior year's results then quote prior-year results. Geez. I’m thinking you just like to read your nonsense.

Please quote where it says you cannot use a prior year's results. Its actually fairly clear when they say "essentially the same players back " that they believe last years results are indicative of this years success. Reading comprehension Geez. Also note that there are multiple people responding.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Florida
Denver
UMASS
Drexel

At least you named some teams but I don't think this years results would indicate that any of them would be more competitive in the ACC than any of the ACC teams.
UMASS Every team in the ACC except Va Tech played a more competitive game against their only common opponent BC and they have not beaten any ranked team seems like a stretch to say they are more competitive than any ACC tournament.
Denver They again have not beaten any ranked team and lost to Colorado who lost to Louisville so so again saying they would be more competitive in the ACC than any ACC team seems to be a stretch
Drexel They lost to the only currently ranked team they played by 5 , that team, Loyola, lost to the only ACC team they played in a completely non competitive game ,while they do have some impressive quality wins not sure that puts them as being more competitive than UVA, ND ,Duke .
Florida This is probably the best resume of the group as they beat Louisville, and played competitive against UNC . The loss to Jacksonville and the fact that their only ranked win is over #20 Louisville seems to indicate that at best they would be equally competitive and that's being generous
In the end they are all good teams but the ACC is just very good this year

Maybe they could just call it the NCAACC tournament.

Comparative scores are never a strong benchmark for comparing teams. Trying to use Top 20 wins or a teams record this year is basically useless. The only true indication of how teams stack up is head to head competition, relative strength of schedule and overall body of work. This year it is all speculation due to the fact that there has been very little out of conference competition between the top programs. In recent years, only North Carolina and Boston College have proven themselves to be a cut above, Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dam are always Top 20, Duke has been a notch below for several years and Va Tech and Louisville are competitive but certainly have never consistently been Top 20. The Reality is that when you look at the DI field there are always a number of teams that are just as competitive as the bottom 5 or 6 ACC teams. There are also always some that are more competitive than ACC Teams. The ACC does have an advantage this year because many other programs will go into the tournament without being battle tested. Teams like Stony Brook, Florida, JMU, Loyola etc... usually play much tougher schedules than they did this year. Is the ACC the Strongest conference? Yes, but on any given year there between 15 - 20 Teams that are as competitive in the ACC as the bottom 5 or 6.

Complete drivel. You don't want to use comparative scores to predict how competitive a team would be nor do you want to use how teams did against top 20 teams instead you want to use strength of schedule which has nothing to do with how good a team is. Talking about how teams have done 3 years ago and more has nothing to do with a current team just look at Drexel. To say a "number of teams that are just as competitive"...as Syracuse , ND , etc is just not looking at current results and teams. Head to head results are generally the best indicator so look at last years as many of the teams have essentially the same players back. The consensus best non ACC team this year seems to be NW, how did they do while playing ACC teams last year. Included in your bottom 6 ACC teams are Cuse, UVA, ND,Duke who went a combined 21-4 out of conference with 2 wins over NW and 1 over MD,Stanford, Princeton, and Navy to name a few.This year those same teams are 17-0 out of conference with wins over JMU,SBU,Loyola,Richmond . To say there are 15-20 teams that are as competitive as these ACC teams is just nonsense.

We get it, you believe all ACC teams would dominate the rest of Division I Women’s Lacrosse teams. That is your opinion, it is not a fact and it has never actually been a reality, who knows maybe this year but in the end you are simply stating your opinion. The reality of actual results for many years shows that on most years there are 2 Final Four Caliber Teams from The ACC. Most on here would agree that after the Top 4 there are probably 15 or so teams that are competitive with each other most years Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dame are in that group. Duke in recent years has been at the bottom of that group.. and Va Tech and Louisville most years are on the outside looking in at that group of teams. Obviously you can have your opinion but the reality of what has actually happened tells a different story. Maybe in this crazy Covid season things will be different.

Actually the only facts are the records of those teams from the ACC who went 38-4 out of conference the past two seasons and that does not include UNC or BC .They have beaten essentially every other top ranked team so yes that seems dominant .Your final four argument is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference.

[/quote]

We get it, you believe all ACC teams would dominate the rest of Division I Women’s Lacrosse teams. That is your opinion, it is not a fact and it has never actually been a reality, who knows maybe this year but in the end you are simply stating your opinion. The reality of actual results for many years shows that on most years there are 2 Final Four Caliber Teams from The ACC. Most on here would agree that after the Top 4 there are probably 15 or so teams that are competitive with each other most years Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dame are in that group. Duke in recent years has been at the bottom of that group.. and Va Tech and Louisville most years are on the outside looking in at that group of teams. Obviously you can have your opinion but the reality of what has actually happened tells a different story. Maybe in this crazy Covid season things will be different.[/quote]
-----------------------------------------
Actually the only facts are the records of those teams from the ACC who went 38-4 out of conference the past two seasons and that does not include UNC or BC .They have beaten essentially every other top ranked team so yes that seems dominant .Your final four argument is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference.[/quote]

------------------------------------------

Have to chime in here as you appear to be another person who just pops off without regard for reality. Below are some facts regarding who ACC teams lose to in the NCAA Tournament:

2016:

Hopkins over UVA
Stony Brook over BC
Northwestern over Louisville
Maryland over Syracuse

2017:

Cornell over ND
JMU over Louisville
Maryland over BC

2018:

Princeton over Syracuse
JMU over UVA
JMU over UNC
JMU over BC

2019:

Northwestern over ND
Northwestern over Syracuse
Maryland over BC

14 times in 4 years ACC Teams were knocked out of The Tournament by Non-ACC Teams

In Contrast, ACC teams knocked each other off only 7 Times.

2016:

UNC over Duke
UNC over ND

2017

BC over Syracuse
UNC over UVA

2018

UNC over Va Tech

2019

UNC over UVA
BC over UNC

You just pop off with nonsense and baseless opinion but feel free to continue to bloviate.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[/quote]

We get it, you believe all ACC teams would dominate the rest of Division I Women’s Lacrosse teams. That is your opinion, it is not a fact and it has never actually been a reality, who knows maybe this year but in the end you are simply stating your opinion. The reality of actual results for many years shows that on most years there are 2 Final Four Caliber Teams from The ACC. Most on here would agree that after the Top 4 there are probably 15 or so teams that are competitive with each other most years Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dame are in that group. Duke in recent years has been at the bottom of that group.. and Va Tech and Louisville most years are on the outside looking in at that group of teams. Obviously you can have your opinion but the reality of what has actually happened tells a different story. Maybe in this crazy Covid season things will be different.

-----------------------------------------
Actually the only facts are the records of those teams from the ACC who went 38-4 out of conference the past two seasons and that does not include UNC or BC .They have beaten essentially every other top ranked team so yes that seems dominant .Your final four argument is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference.[/quote]

------------------------------------------

Have to chime in here as you appear to be another person who just pops off without regard for reality. Below are some facts regarding who ACC teams lose to in the NCAA Tournament:

2016:

Hopkins over UVA
Stony Brook over BC
Northwestern over Louisville
Maryland over Syracuse

2017:

Cornell over ND
JMU over Louisville
Maryland over BC

2018:

Princeton over Syracuse
JMU over UVA
JMU over UNC
JMU over BC

2019:

Northwestern over ND
Northwestern over Syracuse
Maryland over BC

14 times in 4 years ACC Teams were knocked out of The Tournament by Non-ACC Teams

In Contrast, ACC teams knocked each other off only 7 Times.

2016:

UNC over Duke
UNC over ND

2017

BC over Syracuse
UNC over UVA

2018

UNC over Va Tech

2019

UNC over UVA
BC over UNC

You just pop off with nonsense and baseless opinion but feel free to continue to bloviate.[/quote]

ACC guy. Big 10 guy. Same nonsense. Opinions based on no facts but always talking and I guess reading their nonsense. But gotta admit it’s entertaining watching their opinions blow up.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We get it, you believe all ACC teams would dominate the rest of Division I Women’s Lacrosse teams. That is your opinion, it is not a fact and it has never actually been a reality, who knows maybe this year but in the end you are simply stating your opinion. The reality of actual results for many years shows that on most years there are 2 Final Four Caliber Teams from The ACC. Most on here would agree that after the Top 4 there are probably 15 or so teams that are competitive with each other most years Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dame are in that group. Duke in recent years has been at the bottom of that group.. and Va Tech and Louisville most years are on the outside looking in at that group of teams. Obviously you can have your opinion but the reality of what has actually happened tells a different story. Maybe in this crazy Covid season things will be different.

-----------------------------------------
Actually the only facts are the records of those teams from the ACC who went 38-4 out of conference the past two seasons and that does not include UNC or BC .They have beaten essentially every other top ranked team so yes that seems dominant .Your final four argument is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference.[/quote]

------------------------------------------

Have to chime in here as you appear to be another person who just pops off without regard for reality. Below are some facts regarding who ACC teams lose to in the NCAA Tournament:

2016:

Hopkins over UVA
Stony Brook over BC
Northwestern over Louisville
Maryland over Syracuse

2017:

Cornell over ND
JMU over Louisville
Maryland over BC

2018:

Princeton over Syracuse
JMU over UVA
JMU over UNC
JMU over BC

2019:

Northwestern over ND
Northwestern over Syracuse
Maryland over BC

14 times in 4 years ACC Teams were knocked out of The Tournament by Non-ACC Teams

In Contrast, ACC teams knocked each other off only 7 Times.

2016:

UNC over Duke
UNC over ND

2017

BC over Syracuse
UNC over UVA

2018

UNC over Va Tech

2019

UNC over UVA
BC over UNC

You just pop off with nonsense and baseless opinion but feel free to continue to bloviate.[/quote]

ACC guy. Big 10 guy. Same nonsense. Opinions based on no facts but always talking and I guess reading their nonsense. But gotta admit it’s entertaining watching their opinions blow up.[/quote]

Love it when someone spouts their opinion (as if their opinion is fact) and then that opinion is blown up with actual facts.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We get it, you believe all ACC teams would dominate the rest of Division I Women’s Lacrosse teams. That is your opinion, it is not a fact and it has never actually been a reality, who knows maybe this year but in the end you are simply stating your opinion. The reality of actual results for many years shows that on most years there are 2 Final Four Caliber Teams from The ACC. Most on here would agree that after the Top 4 there are probably 15 or so teams that are competitive with each other most years Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dame are in that group. Duke in recent years has been at the bottom of that group.. and Va Tech and Louisville most years are on the outside looking in at that group of teams. Obviously you can have your opinion but the reality of what has actually happened tells a different story. Maybe in this crazy Covid season things will be different.

-----------------------------------------
Actually the only facts are the records of those teams from the ACC who went 38-4 out of conference the past two seasons and that does not include UNC or BC .They have beaten essentially every other top ranked team so yes that seems dominant .Your final four argument is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference.[/quote]

------------------------------------------

Have to chime in here as you appear to be another person who just pops off without regard for reality. Below are some facts regarding who ACC teams lose to in the NCAA Tournament:

2016:

Hopkins over UVA
Stony Brook over BC
Northwestern over Louisville
Maryland over Syracuse

2017:

Cornell over ND
JMU over Louisville
Maryland over BC

2018:

Princeton over Syracuse
JMU over UVA
JMU over UNC
JMU over BC

2019:

Northwestern over ND
Northwestern over Syracuse
Maryland over BC

14 times in 4 years ACC Teams were knocked out of The Tournament by Non-ACC Teams

In Contrast, ACC teams knocked each other off only 7 Times.

2016:

UNC over Duke
UNC over ND

2017

BC over Syracuse
UNC over UVA

2018

UNC over Va Tech

2019

UNC over UVA
BC over UNC

You just pop off with nonsense and baseless opinion but feel free to continue to bloviate.[/quote]

ACC guy. Big 10 guy. Same nonsense. Opinions based on no facts but always talking and I guess reading their nonsense. But gotta admit it’s entertaining watching their opinions blow up.[/quote]

Haven’t seen any “Big 10 guy” on here touting the Big 10 the way some are touting the ACC.... I have seen posts defending the Big 10 but have not read anything from a Big 10 guy bashing other conferences or teams. Most posts supporting the big 10 are in response to a negative post regarding the big 10.
Your ACC guy on the other hand believes that there are no teams that can compete with ACC Teams as if they are all equal to UNC. ACC is a good conference but there are always a bunch of teams that can compete with and beat ACC teams.

Just watched Towson Vs Drexel in CAA Playoffs, great game, Still not sure what happened. The game went into overtime and for some reason (I did not see a foul) the official awards the ball to Drexel to start OT, Drexel player goes to goal and official makes (IMHO) a questionable call and gives Drexel an 8 meter... Game Over. Idk, don’t know why Drexel got the ball and the call was questionable. Just don’t think games should end like that, officials play too big a roll in this sport.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We get it, you believe all ACC teams would dominate the rest of Division I Women’s Lacrosse teams. That is your opinion, it is not a fact and it has never actually been a reality, who knows maybe this year but in the end you are simply stating your opinion. The reality of actual results for many years shows that on most years there are 2 Final Four Caliber Teams from The ACC. Most on here would agree that after the Top 4 there are probably 15 or so teams that are competitive with each other most years Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dame are in that group. Duke in recent years has been at the bottom of that group.. and Va Tech and Louisville most years are on the outside looking in at that group of teams. Obviously you can have your opinion but the reality of what has actually happened tells a different story. Maybe in this crazy Covid season things will be different.

-----------------------------------------
Actually the only facts are the records of those teams from the ACC who went 38-4 out of conference the past two seasons and that does not include UNC or BC .They have beaten essentially every other top ranked team so yes that seems dominant .Your final four argument is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference.[/quote]

------------------------------------------

Have to chime in here as you appear to be another person who just pops off without regard for reality. Below are some facts regarding who ACC teams lose to in the NCAA Tournament:

2016:

Hopkins over UVA
Stony Brook over BC
Northwestern over Louisville
Maryland over Syracuse

2017:

Cornell over ND
JMU over Louisville
Maryland over BC

2018:

Princeton over Syracuse
JMU over UVA
JMU over UNC
JMU over BC

2019:

Northwestern over ND
Northwestern over Syracuse
Maryland over BC

14 times in 4 years ACC Teams were knocked out of The Tournament by Non-ACC Teams

In Contrast, ACC teams knocked each other off only 7 Times.

2016:

UNC over Duke
UNC over ND

2017

BC over Syracuse
UNC over UVA

2018

UNC over Va Tech

2019

UNC over UVA
BC over UNC

You just pop off with nonsense and baseless opinion but feel free to continue to bloviate.[/quote]

ACC guy. Big 10 guy. Same nonsense. Opinions based on no facts but always talking and I guess reading their nonsense. But gotta admit it’s entertaining watching their opinions blow up.[/quote]

It’s the CNN of the anti ACC group . Again genius tell us the team that this year would be more competitive in the ACC than Cuse , ND , Duke , UVA . You just will not do it because you know there are none other than NW. Whats even funnier is your facts show an anti ACC bias , tell us the conference that has more teams that have been knocked out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four by in conference teams compared to the ACC in the years you looked at . It’s not even close . Still waiting on your more competitive teams for this year but we all know you don’t even believe your own drivel.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We get it, you believe all ACC teams would dominate the rest of Division I Women’s Lacrosse teams. That is your opinion, it is not a fact and it has never actually been a reality, who knows maybe this year but in the end you are simply stating your opinion. The reality of actual results for many years shows that on most years there are 2 Final Four Caliber Teams from The ACC. Most on here would agree that after the Top 4 there are probably 15 or so teams that are competitive with each other most years Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dame are in that group. Duke in recent years has been at the bottom of that group.. and Va Tech and Louisville most years are on the outside looking in at that group of teams. Obviously you can have your opinion but the reality of what has actually happened tells a different story. Maybe in this crazy Covid season things will be different.

-----------------------------------------
Actually the only facts are the records of those teams from the ACC who went 38-4 out of conference the past two seasons and that does not include UNC or BC .They have beaten essentially every other top ranked team so yes that seems dominant .Your final four argument is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference.

------------------------------------------

Have to chime in here as you appear to be another person who just pops off without regard for reality. Below are some facts regarding who ACC teams lose to in the NCAA Tournament:

2016:

Hopkins over UVA
Stony Brook over BC
Northwestern over Louisville
Maryland over Syracuse

2017:

Cornell over ND
JMU over Louisville
Maryland over BC

2018:

Princeton over Syracuse
JMU over UVA
JMU over UNC
JMU over BC

2019:

Northwestern over ND
Northwestern over Syracuse
Maryland over BC

14 times in 4 years ACC Teams were knocked out of The Tournament by Non-ACC Teams

In Contrast, ACC teams knocked each other off only 7 Times.

2016:

UNC over Duke
UNC over ND

2017

BC over Syracuse
UNC over UVA

2018

UNC over Va Tech

2019

UNC over UVA
BC over UNC

You just pop off with nonsense and baseless opinion but feel free to continue to bloviate.[/quote]

ACC guy. Big 10 guy. Same nonsense. Opinions based on no facts but always talking and I guess reading their nonsense. But gotta admit it’s entertaining watching their opinions blow up.[/quote]

It’s the CNN of the anti ACC group . Again genius tell us the team that this year would be more competitive in the ACC than Cuse , ND , Duke , UVA . You just will not do it because you know there are none other than NW. Whats even funnier is your facts show an anti ACC bias , tell us the conference that has more teams that have been knocked out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four by in conference teams compared to the ACC in the years you looked at . It’s not even close . Still waiting on your more competitive teams for this year but we all know you don’t even believe your own drivel.[/quote]

You really are funny, people have named multiple teams that are competitive with all but the top ACC teams, yet you keep saying name one. You claim the only reason we do not see an all ACC final four is because the NCAA does not spread the ACC teams out. It is pointed out that several non ACC teams bounce ACC Teams out of the tournament every year yet you still don’t believe it. Maybe this will be the year of the ACC and you can rest easy.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We get it, you believe all ACC teams would dominate the rest of Division I Women’s Lacrosse teams. That is your opinion, it is not a fact and it has never actually been a reality, who knows maybe this year but in the end you are simply stating your opinion. The reality of actual results for many years shows that on most years there are 2 Final Four Caliber Teams from The ACC. Most on here would agree that after the Top 4 there are probably 15 or so teams that are competitive with each other most years Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dame are in that group. Duke in recent years has been at the bottom of that group.. and Va Tech and Louisville most years are on the outside looking in at that group of teams. Obviously you can have your opinion but the reality of what has actually happened tells a different story. Maybe in this crazy Covid season things will be different.

-----------------------------------------
Actually the only facts are the records of those teams from the ACC who went 38-4 out of conference the past two seasons and that does not include UNC or BC .They have beaten essentially every other top ranked team so yes that seems dominant .Your final four argument is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference.

------------------------------------------

Have to chime in here as you appear to be another person who just pops off without regard for reality. Below are some facts regarding who ACC teams lose to in the NCAA Tournament:

2016:

Hopkins over UVA
Stony Brook over BC
Northwestern over Louisville
Maryland over Syracuse

2017:

Cornell over ND
JMU over Louisville
Maryland over BC

2018:

Princeton over Syracuse
JMU over UVA
JMU over UNC
JMU over BC

2019:

Northwestern over ND
Northwestern over Syracuse
Maryland over BC

14 times in 4 years ACC Teams were knocked out of The Tournament by Non-ACC Teams

In Contrast, ACC teams knocked each other off only 7 Times.

2016:

UNC over Duke
UNC over ND

2017

BC over Syracuse
UNC over UVA

2018

UNC over Va Tech

2019

UNC over UVA
BC over UNC

You just pop off with nonsense and baseless opinion but feel free to continue to bloviate.[/quote]

ACC guy. Big 10 guy. Same nonsense. Opinions based on no facts but always talking and I guess reading their nonsense. But gotta admit it’s entertaining watching their opinions blow up.[/quote]

It’s the CNN of the anti ACC group . Again genius tell us the team that this year would be more competitive in the ACC than Cuse , ND , Duke , UVA . You just will not do it because you know there are none other than NW. Whats even funnier is your facts show an anti ACC bias , tell us the conference that has more teams that have been knocked out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four by in conference teams compared to the ACC in the years you looked at . It’s not even close . Still waiting on your more competitive teams for this year but we all know you don’t even believe your own drivel.[/quote]

Talk about delusional.... Here is your quote:

"Your final four argument is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference."

Someone calls BS and proves that you just make things up by displaying the actual result of the NCAA Tournament. It clearly shows that ACC teams are far more likely to be knocked out of the tournament by teams from other conferences than from other ACC Teams yet you still do not believe it. It's not fake news and it's not anti ACC, it is simply actual, factual data.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We get it, you believe all ACC teams would dominate the rest of Division I Women’s Lacrosse teams. That is your opinion, it is not a fact and it has never actually been a reality, who knows maybe this year but in the end you are simply stating your opinion. The reality of actual results for many years shows that on most years there are 2 Final Four Caliber Teams from The ACC. Most on here would agree that after the Top 4 there are probably 15 or so teams that are competitive with each other most years Syracuse, Virginia, Notre Dame are in that group. Duke in recent years has been at the bottom of that group.. and Va Tech and Louisville most years are on the outside looking in at that group of teams. Obviously you can have your opinion but the reality of what has actually happened tells a different story. Maybe in this crazy Covid season things will be different.

-----------------------------------------
Actually the only facts are the records of those teams from the ACC who went 38-4 out of conference the past two seasons and that does not include UNC or BC .They have beaten essentially every other top ranked team so yes that seems dominant .Your final four argument is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference.

------------------------------------------

Have to chime in here as you appear to be another person who just pops off without regard for reality. Below are some facts regarding who ACC teams lose to in the NCAA Tournament:

2016:

Hopkins over UVA
Stony Brook over BC
Northwestern over Louisville
Maryland over Syracuse

2017:

Cornell over ND
JMU over Louisville
Maryland over BC

2018:

Princeton over Syracuse
JMU over UVA
JMU over UNC
JMU over BC

2019:

Northwestern over ND
Northwestern over Syracuse
Maryland over BC

14 times in 4 years ACC Teams were knocked out of The Tournament by Non-ACC Teams

In Contrast, ACC teams knocked each other off only 7 Times.

2016:

UNC over Duke
UNC over ND

2017

BC over Syracuse
UNC over UVA

2018

UNC over Va Tech

2019

UNC over UVA
BC over UNC

You just pop off with nonsense and baseless opinion but feel free to continue to bloviate.[/quote]
-------------------------------------------
ACC guy. Big 10 guy. Same nonsense. Opinions based on no facts but always talking and I guess reading their nonsense. But gotta admit it’s entertaining watching their opinions blow up.[/quote]
---------------------------------------------
It’s the CNN of the anti ACC group . Again genius tell us the team that this year would be more competitive in the ACC than Cuse , ND , Duke , UVA . You just will not do it because you know there are none other than NW. Whats even funnier is your facts show an anti ACC bias , tell us the conference that has more teams that have been knocked out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four by in conference teams compared to the ACC in the years you looked at . It’s not even close . Still waiting on your more competitive teams for this year but we all know you don’t even believe your own drivel.[/quote]

---------------------------------------------------------

To piggyback on an earlier post.... which points how many other teams beat ACC teams every year and would be just as competitive in the ACC as all but the Top 2 or 3 teams every year.

" I would say there are many teams that would be just as competitive in The ACC as ND, Duke, UVA, Va Tech, And Louisville. Just looked at 2016 - 2019... for ND, Duke, UVA and Syracuse here are their Non-Conference Losses:

* Notre Dame - Beaten by Northwestern 5x, USC 2x, High Point, Albany, Princeton, Towson, Cornell.

* Duke - Beaten by Northwestern 3x, Penn 2x, Stanford 2x, Penn State, High Point, USC, Elon, Georgetown.

* UVA - Beaten by Maryland 4x, Penn State 2x, Princeton 2x, Loyola 2x, JMU 2x, Elon , Navy, Hopkins.

* Syracuse - Beaten by Maryland 5x, Princeton 2x, Northwestern 2x, Florida 2x.

* Va Tech - Beaten by JMU 4x, USC 2x, Colorado 2x, Navy, Old Dominion, Ohio State, Elon, William & Mary.

* Louisville - Beaten by Northwestern 3x, Denver 2x, JMU, Robert Morris, Brown, Marquette, Vanderbilt, Delaware.

I will give Syracuse and Virginia credit because the do play competitive non-conference schedules but ND and Duke have become a bit of a joke with their non-conference schedules.

Plenty of Programs would be Just as competitive as 5 or 6 of the ACC teams on any given year."

You appear to be obsessed with 2020 and 2021 which will always have an asterisk because of the pandemic, the abbreviated 19' season and the Covid influenced 20'. The reality is that there are always a number of teams that can and do compete with all but the Top 2 or 3 ACC teams. Just being in the ACC does not place a team on the same level as North Carolina.

If you take out the human opinion and leave rankings to a computer based on record and strength of schedule and performance, here’s what you get......

1 North Carolina ACC 18-0 4-0 0-0 14-0 0-0
2 Syracuse ACC 14-3 6-2 2-0 6-1 0-0
3 Boston College ACC 13-3 3-2 1-1 9-0 0-0
4 Drexel CAA 12-1 7-1 0-0 5-0 0-0
5 Notre Dame ACC 9-6 3-5 1-0 5-1 0-0
6 Northwestern Big Ten 13-0 5-0 2-0 6-0 0-0
7 Stony Brook America East 12-2 6-2 0-0 6-0 0-0
8 Hofstra CAA 6-5 2-3 1-0 3-2 0-0
9 Loyola Maryland Patriot 9-2 3-1 0-0 6-1 0-0
10 Massachusetts Atlantic 10 15-2 6-2 0-0 9-0 0-0
11 Florida AAC 14-2 7-2 0-0 7-0 0-0
12 Stanford Pac-12 9-0 6-0 0-0 3-0 0-0
13 Denver Big East 13-1 4-1 0-0 9-0 0-0
14 Vanderbilt AAC 12-5 4-4 0-0 8-1 0-0
15 Jacksonville ASUN 9-1 6-0 0-0 3-1 0-0
16 Duke ACC 9-7 4-3 0-1 5-3 0-0
17 Temple AAC 11-4 6-1 0-0 5-3 0-0
18 Fairfield MAAC 11-1 5-0 0-0 6-1 0-0
19 Siena MAAC 10-2 4-2 0-0 6-0 0-0
20 Saint Joseph's Atlantic 10 10-7 4-3 1-0 5-4 0-0
21 James Madison CAA 9-4 2-2 0-1 7-1 0-0
22 Towson CAA 8-7 3-4 0-0 5-3 0-0
23 Virginia ACC 8-8 2-4 0-1 6-3 0-0
24 Mount St. Mary's NEC 12-2 5-1 0-0 7-1 0-0
25 Albany (NY) America East 10-6 3-4 0-0 7-2 0-0
26 Navy Patriot 8-3 4-1 0-0 4-2 0-0
27 Elon CAA 9-2 4-1 0-0 5-1 0-0
28 Davidson Atlantic 10 11-4 5-3 0-0 6-1 0-0
29 Colorado Pac-12 7-6 2-5 0-0 5-1 0-0
30 Penn Ivy League 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0
31 Louisville ACC 5-11 3-5 0-0 2-6 0-0
32 UConn Big East 11-5 6-3 0-0 5-2 0-0
33 Arizona St. Pac-12 9-5 3-3 0-0 6-2 0-0
34 Lehigh Patriot 7-3 3-1 0-0 4-2 0-0
35 Niagara MAAC 8-4 2-3 0-0 6-1 0-0
36 Maryland Big Ten 9-6 1-5 2-1 6-0 0-0
37 High Point Big South 10-7 3-4 0-0 7-3 0-0
38 Wagner NEC 9-4 5-2 0-0 4-2 0-0
39 Southern California Pac-12 9-6 4-3 0-0 5-3 0-0
40 Robert Morris MAC 13-2 6-2 0-0 7-0 0-0
41 Marist MAAC 3-5 0-3 1-0 2-2 0-0
42 Coastal Carolina SoCon 10-6 6-3 1-1 3-2 0-0
43 Virginia Tech ACC 5-11 3-6 0-1 2-4 0-0
44 Furman SoCon 11-4 6-4 0-0 5-0 0-0
45 Richmond Atlantic 10 10-2 5-0 0-1 5-1 0-0
46 Johns Hopkins Big Ten 8-6 5-1 1-1 2-4 0-0
47 Liberty ASUN 9-8 4-6 0-0 5-2 0-0
48 UMBC America East 6-5 2-4 0-0 4-1 0-0
49 Army West Point Patriot 5-3 3-2 0-0 2-1 0-0
50 Monmouth MAAC 8-4 2-3 0-0 6-1 0-0
51 Georgetown Big East 6-9 1-5 0-0 5-4 0-0
52 Cincinnati AAC 7-9 2-5 0-0 5-4 0-0
53 Villanova Big East 6-10 0-7 0-0 6-3 0-0
54 UC Davis MPSF 12-4 6-3 1-0 5-1 0-0
55 LIU NEC 9-4 4-3 0-0 5-1 0-0
56 Vermont America East 6-5 4-1 0-0 2-4 0-0
57 Rutgers Big Ten 6-8 1-5 1-1 4-2 0-0
58 East Carolina AAC 4-12 1-7 0-0 3-5 0-0
59 Bryant NEC 7-5 3-3 0-0 4-2 0-0
60 Central Mich. MAC 8-6 3-3 0-0 5-3 0-0
61 Mercer SoCon 5-7 2-5 0-0 3-2 0-0
62 Quinnipiac MAAC 5-7 0-7 0-0 5-0 0-0
63 Boston U. Patriot 4-5 1-3 0-0 3-2 0-0
64 Duquesne Atlantic 10 4-5 1-3 0-0 3-2 0-0
65 Canisius MAAC 2-8 1-6 0-0 1-2 0-0
66 VCU Atlantic 10 7-9 2-6 0-0 5-3 0-0
67 Marquette Big East 7-9 5-4 0-0 2-5 0-0
68 George Washington Atlantic 10 6-6 4-3 0-0 2-3 0-0
69 La Salle Atlantic 10 5-9 1-6 0-0 4-3 0-0
70 Campbell Big South 8-7 5-2 0-0 3-5 0-0
71 William & Mary CAA 3-9 2-4 0-0 1-5 0-0
72 Sacred Heart NEC 6-7 4-2 0-0 2-5 0-0
73 Penn St. Big Ten 4-9 0-6 0-1 4-2 0-0
74 San Diego St. MPSF 5-9 2-4 0-0 3-5 0-0
75 Bucknell Patriot 3-6 0-4 0-0 3-2 0-0
76 Ohio St. Big Ten 4-9 1-5 0-1 3-3 0-0
77 Saint Francis (PA) NEC 4-9 1-5 0-0 3-4 0-0
78 Manhattan MAAC 3-9 2-5 0-0 1-4 0-0
79 Kennesaw St. ASUN 5-9 3-4 0-0 2-5 0-0
80 Stetson ASUN 1-7 1-4 0-0 0-3 0-0
81 Colgate Patriot 4-5 2-4 0-0 2-1 0-0
82 American Patriot 1-7 0-4 0-0 1-3 0-0
83 Radford Big South 6-12 3-8 0-1 3-3 0-0
84 Winthrop Big South 7-8 3-5 0-0 4-3 0-0
85 Oregon Pac-12 3-9 2-6 0-0 1-3 0-0
86 Binghamton America East 3-5 1-2 0-0 2-3 0-0
87 Michigan Big Ten 3-9 1-5 0-1 2-3 0-0
88 UMass Lowell America East 4-8 2-5 0-0 2-3 0-0
89 George Mason Atlantic 10 1-14 1-9 0-0 0-5 0-0
90 New Hampshire America East 4-7 1-4 0-0 3-3 0-0
91 Old Dominion AAC 3-14 0-4 0-0 3-10 0-0
92 St. Bonaventure Atlantic 10 2-10 1-6 0-0 1-4 0-0
93 Holy Cross Patriot 2-4 1-2 0-0 1-2 0-0
94 California Pac-12 2-15 1-8 0-0 1-7 0-0
95 Fresno St. MPSF 2-12 2-6 0-0 0-6 0-0
96 Butler Big East 0-11 0-6 0-0 0-5 1-0
97 Kent St. MAC 5-10 2-5 0-0 3-5 0-0
98 Akron MAC 7-8 3-4 0-0 4-4 0-0
99 Iona MAAC 1-11 1-4 0-1 0-6 0-0
100 Delaware CAA 1-5 0-2 0-0 1-3 0-0
101 Youngstown St. MAC 2-7 2-2 0-0 0-5 0-0
102 Gardner-Webb Big South 4-10 2-6 0-0 2-4 0-0
103 Merrimack NEC 3-11 1-7 0-0 2-4 0-0
104 Detroit Mercy MAC 2-6 2-2 0-0 0-4 0-0
105 Central Conn. St. NEC 0-14 0-7 0-0 0-7 0-0
106 Longwood Big South 2-13 0-8 0-0 2-5 0-0
107 Lafayette Patriot 0-6 0-3 0-0 0-3 0-0
108 Hartford America East 0-9 0-4 0-0 0-5 0-0
109 Wofford SoCon 2-8 2-4 0-0 0-4 0-0
110 Presbyterian Big South 2-10 2-5 0-0 0-5 2-0
111 Delaware St. SoCon 0-9 0-5 0-0 0-4 1-0
112 Dartmouth

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If you take out the human opinion and leave rankings to a computer based on record and strength of schedule and performance, here’s what you get......

1 North Carolina ACC 18-0 4-0 0-0 14-0 0-0
2 Syracuse ACC 14-3 6-2 2-0 6-1 0-0
3 Boston College ACC 13-3 3-2 1-1 9-0 0-0
4 Drexel CAA 12-1 7-1 0-0 5-0 0-0
5 Notre Dame ACC 9-6 3-5 1-0 5-1 0-0
6 Northwestern Big Ten 13-0 5-0 2-0 6-0 0-0
7 Stony Brook America East 12-2 6-2 0-0 6-0 0-0
8 Hofstra CAA 6-5 2-3 1-0 3-2 0-0
9 Loyola Maryland Patriot 9-2 3-1 0-0 6-1 0-0
10 Massachusetts Atlantic 10 15-2 6-2 0-0 9-0 0-0
11 Florida AAC 14-2 7-2 0-0 7-0 0-0
12 Stanford Pac-12 9-0 6-0 0-0 3-0 0-0
13 Denver Big East 13-1 4-1 0-0 9-0 0-0
14 Vanderbilt AAC 12-5 4-4 0-0 8-1 0-0
15 Jacksonville ASUN 9-1 6-0 0-0 3-1 0-0
16 Duke ACC 9-7 4-3 0-1 5-3 0-0
17 Temple AAC 11-4 6-1 0-0 5-3 0-0
18 Fairfield MAAC 11-1 5-0 0-0 6-1 0-0
19 Siena MAAC 10-2 4-2 0-0 6-0 0-0
20 Saint Joseph's Atlantic 10 10-7 4-3 1-0 5-4 0-0
21 James Madison CAA 9-4 2-2 0-1 7-1 0-0
22 Towson CAA 8-7 3-4 0-0 5-3 0-0
23 Virginia ACC 8-8 2-4 0-1 6-3 0-0
24 Mount St. Mary's NEC 12-2 5-1 0-0 7-1 0-0
25 Albany (NY) America East 10-6 3-4 0-0 7-2 0-0
26 Navy Patriot 8-3 4-1 0-0 4-2 0-0
27 Elon CAA 9-2 4-1 0-0 5-1 0-0
28 Davidson Atlantic 10 11-4 5-3 0-0 6-1 0-0
29 Colorado Pac-12 7-6 2-5 0-0 5-1 0-0
30 Penn Ivy League 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0
31 Louisville ACC 5-11 3-5 0-0 2-6 0-0
32 UConn Big East 11-5 6-3 0-0 5-2 0-0
33 Arizona St. Pac-12 9-5 3-3 0-0 6-2 0-0
34 Lehigh Patriot 7-3 3-1 0-0 4-2 0-0
35 Niagara MAAC 8-4 2-3 0-0 6-1 0-0
36 Maryland Big Ten 9-6 1-5 2-1 6-0 0-0
37 High Point Big South 10-7 3-4 0-0 7-3 0-0
38 Wagner NEC 9-4 5-2 0-0 4-2 0-0
39 Southern California Pac-12 9-6 4-3 0-0 5-3 0-0
40 Robert Morris MAC 13-2 6-2 0-0 7-0 0-0
41 Marist MAAC 3-5 0-3 1-0 2-2 0-0
42 Coastal Carolina SoCon 10-6 6-3 1-1 3-2 0-0
43 Virginia Tech ACC 5-11 3-6 0-1 2-4 0-0
44 Furman SoCon 11-4 6-4 0-0 5-0 0-0
45 Richmond Atlantic 10 10-2 5-0 0-1 5-1 0-0
46 Johns Hopkins Big Ten 8-6 5-1 1-1 2-4 0-0
47 Liberty ASUN 9-8 4-6 0-0 5-2 0-0
48 UMBC America East 6-5 2-4 0-0 4-1 0-0
49 Army West Point Patriot 5-3 3-2 0-0 2-1 0-0
50 Monmouth MAAC 8-4 2-3 0-0 6-1 0-0
51 Georgetown Big East 6-9 1-5 0-0 5-4 0-0
52 Cincinnati AAC 7-9 2-5 0-0 5-4 0-0
53 Villanova Big East 6-10 0-7 0-0 6-3 0-0
54 UC Davis MPSF 12-4 6-3 1-0 5-1 0-0
55 LIU NEC 9-4 4-3 0-0 5-1 0-0
56 Vermont America East 6-5 4-1 0-0 2-4 0-0
57 Rutgers Big Ten 6-8 1-5 1-1 4-2 0-0
58 East Carolina AAC 4-12 1-7 0-0 3-5 0-0
59 Bryant NEC 7-5 3-3 0-0 4-2 0-0
60 Central Mich. MAC 8-6 3-3 0-0 5-3 0-0
61 Mercer SoCon 5-7 2-5 0-0 3-2 0-0
62 Quinnipiac MAAC 5-7 0-7 0-0 5-0 0-0
63 Boston U. Patriot 4-5 1-3 0-0 3-2 0-0
64 Duquesne Atlantic 10 4-5 1-3 0-0 3-2 0-0
65 Canisius MAAC 2-8 1-6 0-0 1-2 0-0
66 VCU Atlantic 10 7-9 2-6 0-0 5-3 0-0
67 Marquette Big East 7-9 5-4 0-0 2-5 0-0
68 George Washington Atlantic 10 6-6 4-3 0-0 2-3 0-0
69 La Salle Atlantic 10 5-9 1-6 0-0 4-3 0-0
70 Campbell Big South 8-7 5-2 0-0 3-5 0-0
71 William & Mary CAA 3-9 2-4 0-0 1-5 0-0
72 Sacred Heart NEC 6-7 4-2 0-0 2-5 0-0
73 Penn St. Big Ten 4-9 0-6 0-1 4-2 0-0
74 San Diego St. MPSF 5-9 2-4 0-0 3-5 0-0
75 Bucknell Patriot 3-6 0-4 0-0 3-2 0-0
76 Ohio St. Big Ten 4-9 1-5 0-1 3-3 0-0
77 Saint Francis (PA) NEC 4-9 1-5 0-0 3-4 0-0
78 Manhattan MAAC 3-9 2-5 0-0 1-4 0-0
79 Kennesaw St. ASUN 5-9 3-4 0-0 2-5 0-0
80 Stetson ASUN 1-7 1-4 0-0 0-3 0-0
81 Colgate Patriot 4-5 2-4 0-0 2-1 0-0
82 American Patriot 1-7 0-4 0-0 1-3 0-0
83 Radford Big South 6-12 3-8 0-1 3-3 0-0
84 Winthrop Big South 7-8 3-5 0-0 4-3 0-0
85 Oregon Pac-12 3-9 2-6 0-0 1-3 0-0
86 Binghamton America East 3-5 1-2 0-0 2-3 0-0
87 Michigan Big Ten 3-9 1-5 0-1 2-3 0-0
88 UMass Lowell America East 4-8 2-5 0-0 2-3 0-0
89 George Mason Atlantic 10 1-14 1-9 0-0 0-5 0-0
90 New Hampshire America East 4-7 1-4 0-0 3-3 0-0
91 Old Dominion AAC 3-14 0-4 0-0 3-10 0-0
92 St. Bonaventure Atlantic 10 2-10 1-6 0-0 1-4 0-0
93 Holy Cross Patriot 2-4 1-2 0-0 1-2 0-0
94 California Pac-12 2-15 1-8 0-0 1-7 0-0
95 Fresno St. MPSF 2-12 2-6 0-0 0-6 0-0
96 Butler Big East 0-11 0-6 0-0 0-5 1-0
97 Kent St. MAC 5-10 2-5 0-0 3-5 0-0
98 Akron MAC 7-8 3-4 0-0 4-4 0-0
99 Iona MAAC 1-11 1-4 0-1 0-6 0-0
100 Delaware CAA 1-5 0-2 0-0 1-3 0-0
101 Youngstown St. MAC 2-7 2-2 0-0 0-5 0-0
102 Gardner-Webb Big South 4-10 2-6 0-0 2-4 0-0
103 Merrimack NEC 3-11 1-7 0-0 2-4 0-0
104 Detroit Mercy MAC 2-6 2-2 0-0 0-4 0-0
105 Central Conn. St. NEC 0-14 0-7 0-0 0-7 0-0
106 Longwood Big South 2-13 0-8 0-0 2-5 0-0
107 Lafayette Patriot 0-6 0-3 0-0 0-3 0-0
108 Hartford America East 0-9 0-4 0-0 0-5 0-0
109 Wofford SoCon 2-8 2-4 0-0 0-4 0-0
110 Presbyterian Big South 2-10 2-5 0-0 0-5 2-0
111 Delaware St. SoCon 0-9 0-5 0-0 0-4 1-0
112 Dartmouth

RPI and all other Data Points useless this year.... Below is a snipet from the mens side...

--- "But for the purposes of this exercise, the most dramatic change is the Big Ten and MAAC teams’ scheduling only conference opponents, thereby rendering the RPI — the building block of all of the NCAA selection criteria — essentially unusable.

A team's RPI formula is comparatively simple: it’s 25% of its winning percentage * 50% of its opponents’ winning percentage * 25% of its opponents’ opponents’ winning percentage. The problem arises when teams play only within its (in the Big Ten’s case) six-team group; their RPIs are completely independent from all the other teams’. Yes, every team still has a score, but some teams’ scores have no relationship to one another and, as a result, the ranking is meaningless.

Look at the NCAA’s recent release of the RPI. In a normal circumstance, a 9-0 Maryland team would likely be No. 1 overall, at worst top three; their RPI is 7th. An 8-0 Lehigh wouldn’t be too far behind; they’re 13th. It’s logical that the Big Ten teams are distributed throughout the 66 DI teams that have played a game this season (Rutgers 12, Ohio State 33, Penn State 42, Michigan 52, Johns Hopkins 56) because their RPI is functioning like a mini RPI alongside the bigger RPI. Perhaps no ranking better illustrates the RPI’s current flaw better than 1-0 Marist (the NCAA's hasn’t been updated since their Tuesday win over Quinnipiac) being ranked No. 6 and 5-1 Monmouth being ranked No. 11 (we project that, with the win, the Red Foxes RPI jumped to No. 1) .

While the RPI isn’t necessarily its own criterion, it’s the basis upon which the other criteria are formed: Strength of Schedule, Non-Conference SOS and Quality Wins are all outcomes of the RPI.

So if those criteria can’t be used, what will be used in its place? We don’t really know yet.

Part of the reason we don’t know is because the NCAA Committee had a lot of fish to fry; only in the last week have they figured out (or decided) where they’re going to play the first round games. On Wednesday, they hosted a call with the Regional Advisory Committees to get coach feedback on current team performances.

On March 31, Committee chair Tim Leonard told IL “[The data issues are] really going to be difficult on how we do this, and the eye test is going to come into play a lot more than it ever does.”

As a proxy for the eye test, which is informed by coaches on the “RAC calls” (as they’re referred to), we’ve included the coaches’ poll ranking in our resume list below.

Luckily for the committee, the most important decision — which at-large team is the last selected for the tournament field and which is the first out — appears to be pretty clear… for now.

Seeding the top eight teams appears as though it may be a substantial challenge, and matching up their first round opponents will be an interesting exercise from a geographic perspective given the decision to host first round games at four sites. That said, the line between No. 8 and No. 9 is negligible this year since the top eight seeds do not host at their home venue."

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just watched Towson Vs Drexel in CAA Playoffs, great game, Still not sure what happened. The game went into overtime and for some reason (I did not see a foul) the official awards the ball to Drexel to start OT, Drexel player goes to goal and official makes (IMHO) a questionable call and gives Drexel an 8 meter... Game Over. Idk, don’t know why Drexel got the ball and the call was questionable. Just don’t think games should end like that, officials play too big a roll in this sport.

It's role and not roll and officials play a huge factor in every sport. stinks for Towson, however that's how the ball bounces........or rolls.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just watched Towson Vs Drexel in CAA Playoffs, great game, Still not sure what happened. The game went into overtime and for some reason (I did not see a foul) the official awards the ball to Drexel to start OT, Drexel player goes to goal and official makes (IMHO) a questionable call and gives Drexel an 8 meter... Game Over. Idk, don’t know why Drexel got the ball and the call was questionable. Just don’t think games should end like that, officials play too big a roll in this sport.

It's role and not roll and officials play a huge factor in every sport. stinks for Towson, however that's how the ball bounces........or rolls.

I heard a player from Towson got hurt late and is normally on the draw circle. In OT Towson ended up short a girl for the draw and once the draw is set in position and ready to go, you cannot send another player running on the field at that time since they were set and ready to go. A girl ran on late and that delayed the draw so they get a green card. I do not know how accurate this is so if someone was there and knows please correct me

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just watched Towson Vs Drexel in CAA Playoffs, great game, Still not sure what happened. The game went into overtime and for some reason (I did not see a foul) the official awards the ball to Drexel to start OT, Drexel player goes to goal and official makes (IMHO) a questionable call and gives Drexel an 8 meter... Game Over. Idk, don’t know why Drexel got the ball and the call was questionable. Just don’t think games should end like that, officials play too big a roll in this sport.

It's role and not roll and officials play a huge factor in every sport. stinks for Towson, however that's how the ball bounces........or rolls.

If you are going to make corrections, at least write a grammatically correct sentence.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just watched Towson Vs Drexel in CAA Playoffs, great game, Still not sure what happened. The game went into overtime and for some reason (I did not see a foul) the official awards the ball to Drexel to start OT, Drexel player goes to goal and official makes (IMHO) a questionable call and gives Drexel an 8 meter... Game Over. Idk, don’t know why Drexel got the ball and the call was questionable. Just don’t think games should end like that, officials play too big a roll in this sport.

It's role and not roll and officials play a huge factor in every sport. stinks for Towson, however that's how the ball bounces........or rolls.

I heard a player from Towson got hurt late and is normally on the draw circle. In OT Towson ended up short a girl for the draw and once the draw is set in position and ready to go, you cannot send another player running on the field at that time since they were set and ready to go. A girl ran on late and that delayed the draw so they get a green card. I do not know how accurate this is so if someone was there and knows please correct me

Wow, tough break for the Tigers. Although in the end, I don't think it mattered much considering the fact that both teams made the NCAA Tournament and were placed in the same bracket (don't get me started). Hope the coaches learned their lesson.

NCAA Tournament field looks okay but they could have done a better job with the brackets. CAA has four teams in the tournament 3 are in the same bracket, Big 10 has 4 as well and are split between 2 brackets. With the ACC having 6 teams in the tournament there was now way to avoid some overlap but did they need to put three in the same bracket ? I realize the NCAA uses geography to place teams but maybe they could have done a better solution.

Good luck to all!

Actually, the only facts are the records of those teams from the ACC who went 38-4 out of conference the past two seasons and that does not include UNC or BC. They have beaten essentially every other top-ranked team so yes that seems dominant.Your final four arguments is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference.[/quote]

------------------------------------------

Have to chime in here as you appear to be another person who just pops off without regard for reality. Below are some facts regarding who ACC teams lose to in the NCAA Tournament:

2016:

Hopkins over UVA
Stony Brook over BC
Northwestern over Louisville
Maryland over Syracuse

2017:

Cornell over ND
JMU over Louisville
Maryland over BC

2018:

Princeton over Syracuse
JMU over UVA
JMU over UNC
JMU over BC

2019:

Northwestern over ND
Northwestern over Syracuse
Maryland over BC

14 times in 4 years ACC Teams were knocked out of The Tournament by Non-ACC Teams

In Contrast, ACC teams knocked each other off only 7 Times.

2016:

UNC over Duke
UNC over ND

2017

BC over Syracuse
UNC over UVA

2018

UNC over Va Tech

2019

UNC over UVA
BC over UNC

You just pop off with nonsense and baseless opinion but feel free to continue to bloviate.[/quote]

ACC guy. Big 10 guy. Same nonsense. Opinions based on no facts but always talking and I guess reading their nonsense. But gotta admit it’s entertaining watching their opinions blow up.[/quote]

It’s the CNN of the anti-ACC group. Again genius tells us the team that this year would be more competitive in the ACC than Cuse, ND, Duke, UVA. You just will not do it because you know there are none other than NW. What's even funnier is your facts show an anti-ACC bias, tell us the conference that has more teams that have been knocked out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four by in-conference teams compared to the ACC in the years you looked at. It’s not even close. Still waiting on your more competitive teams for this year but we all know you don’t even believe your own drivel.[/quote]

Talk about fools... Here is your quote:

"Your final four argument is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference."

Someone calls BS and proves that you just make things up by displaying the actual result of the NCAA Tournament. It clearly shows that ACC teams are far more likely to be knocked out of the tournament by teams from other conferences than from other ACC Teams yet you still do not believe it. It's not fake news and it's not anti ACC, it is simply actual, factual data.[/quote]

You bunch of Anti ACC lemmings are too dense to realize that your breakfast tasted a lot like crow this morning. 5 of the top 7 seeds are ACC teams. I said name a team that would be more competitive this year in the ACC than Duke ,ND, UVA other than NW and you bunch of clowns tried to switch it to" as" competitive and the seeding committee seems to think otherwise. Then comes your big argument against "many ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA... " no one said that it happens more often than not its just you needed to change the narrative again .No one said it does not happen to other conferences but it happens to the ACC more than most. Still waiting on that list of teams that would have been more competitive than Duke ,ND, UVa this year in the ACC and yes if Louisville and Va Tech had made the tournament there are a number of teams they could have beaten that made it in.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Actually, the only facts are the records of those teams from the ACC who went 38-4 out of conference the past two seasons and that does not include UNC or BC. They have beaten essentially every other top-ranked team so yes that seems dominant.Your final four arguments is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference.

------------------------------------------

Have to chime in here as you appear to be another person who just pops off without regard for reality. Below are some facts regarding who ACC teams lose to in the NCAA Tournament:

2016:

Hopkins over UVA
Stony Brook over BC
Northwestern over Louisville
Maryland over Syracuse

2017:

Cornell over ND
JMU over Louisville
Maryland over BC

2018:

Princeton over Syracuse
JMU over UVA
JMU over UNC
JMU over BC

2019:

Northwestern over ND
Northwestern over Syracuse
Maryland over BC

14 times in 4 years ACC Teams were knocked out of The Tournament by Non-ACC Teams

In Contrast, ACC teams knocked each other off only 7 Times.

2016:

UNC over Duke
UNC over ND

2017

BC over Syracuse
UNC over UVA

2018

UNC over Va Tech

2019

UNC over UVA
BC over UNC

You just pop off with nonsense and baseless opinion but feel free to continue to bloviate.[/quote]

ACC guy. Big 10 guy. Same nonsense. Opinions based on no facts but always talking and I guess reading their nonsense. But gotta admit it’s entertaining watching their opinions blow up.[/quote]

It’s the CNN of the anti-ACC group. Again genius tells us the team that this year would be more competitive in the ACC than Cuse, ND, Duke, UVA. You just will not do it because you know there are none other than NW. What's even funnier is your facts show an anti-ACC bias, tell us the conference that has more teams that have been knocked out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four by in-conference teams compared to the ACC in the years you looked at. It’s not even close. Still waiting on your more competitive teams for this year but we all know you don’t even believe your own drivel.[/quote]

Talk about fools... Here is your quote:

"Your final four argument is a joke as many of the ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA tournament prior to the final four. You will see the same happen this year as the NCAA does not try to space out teams from the same conference."

Someone calls BS and proves that you just make things up by displaying the actual result of the NCAA Tournament. It clearly shows that ACC teams are far more likely to be knocked out of the tournament by teams from other conferences than from other ACC Teams yet you still do not believe it. It's not fake news and it's not anti ACC, it is simply actual, factual data.[/quote]

You bunch of Anti ACC lemmings are too dense to realize that your breakfast tasted a lot like crow this morning. 5 of the top 7 seeds are ACC teams. I said name a team that would be more competitive this year in the ACC than Duke ,ND, UVA other than NW and you bunch of clowns tried to switch it to" as" competitive and the seeding committee seems to think otherwise. Then comes your big argument against "many ACC teams have knocked each other out of the NCAA... " no one said that it happens more often than not its just you needed to change the narrative again .No one said it does not happen to other conferences but it happens to the ACC more than most. Still waiting on that list of teams that would have been more competitive than Duke ,ND, UVa this year in the ACC and yes if Louisville and Va Tech had made the tournament there are a number of teams they could have beaten that made it in.[/quote]

If I were a betting man I would bet that your daughter plays at ND or Syracuse hence the obsession with "this year". From what I have seen however, everybody agrees that the ACC is a good conference but your incessant rants about naming one team that would be more competitive in an irregular to say the least season is very strange. We will see what happens in the tournament, from the looks of it we will most likely see 3 ACC Teams in the Final Four. I don't think the Committee had much of a choice because of the strange scheduling this year. Several perennial Top 10 - 20 teams did not actually compete among the field this season and several others had extremely limited out of conference competition. It looks like the ACC and the CAA benefited the most from the lack of traditional cross-over games. The ACC benefited most in terms of seeding (most years they get 2-4 seeds) this year they have 6. CAA benefited with more teams in the tournament (most years they get 2 teams in) this year they have 4 in the tournament. PAC 12 usually has 2 teams in the tournament this year only 1. Big 10 is normal with 4 teams in the tournament. Ivy's traditionally have 2-3 Teams in the tournament and 1or 2 are usually seeded. CAA benefited with more teams but were put in the same bracket. Big 10 has their normal number of teams but are paired in the same brackets. I could be wrong but it appears that only the ACC is the only conference with multiple teams in the tournament that do not have conference opponents in the same bracket.

Towson lost possesion on the draw entering OT because coach had too many players on field. Also Sad. to see. Towson star player. go down hope. she is ok

“ I could be wrong but it appears that only the ACC is the only conference with multiple teams in the tournament that do not have conference opponents in the same bracket.”
What the what ? You are truly pathetic “everyone agrees that the ACC is a good conference” , you can’t even say the words that the ACC is the best conference for lacrosse in both men’s and women’s . You clowns keep bringing up previous years results from many years ago to try and make predictions about this years teams , it’s a ridiculously obtuse argument from if I were a betting man a ridiculously jealous parent who realizes his kids conference is essentially 13th grade.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“ I could be wrong but it appears that only the ACC is the only conference with multiple teams in the tournament that do not have conference opponents in the same bracket.”
What the what ? You are truly pathetic “everyone agrees that the ACC is a good conference” , you can’t even say the words that the ACC is the best conference for lacrosse in both men’s and women’s . You clowns keep bringing up previous years results from many years ago to try and make predictions about this years teams , it’s a ridiculously obtuse argument from if I were a betting man a ridiculously jealous parent who realizes his kids conference is essentially 13th grade.

I have not seen where anyone has made any predictions nor have I read any post claiming the ACC is not the best conference. The only thing that has been pointed out is that not all ACC Teams are created equal and that there have always been many teams that are able to complete with the ACC teams. You obviously believe that by being in The ACC your daughters team is better than all other teams. It has been pointed out that in normal years many teams beat ACC teams. If you can not understand that this year is not a normal year I don’t know what to tell you. At the end of the day the past year and a half will be a blip on the history of the sport and know for the Covid craziness.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“ I could be wrong but it appears that only the ACC is the only conference with multiple teams in the tournament that do not have conference opponents in the same bracket.”
What the what ? You are truly pathetic “everyone agrees that the ACC is a good conference” , you can’t even say the words that the ACC is the best conference for lacrosse in both men’s and women’s . You clowns keep bringing up previous years results from many years ago to try and make predictions about this years teams , it’s a ridiculously obtuse argument from if I were a betting man a ridiculously jealous parent who realizes his kids conference is essentially 13th grade.

I have not seen where anyone has made any predictions nor have I read any post claiming the ACC is not the best conference. The only thing that has been pointed out is that not all ACC Teams are created equal and that there have always been many teams that are able to complete with the ACC teams. You obviously believe that by being in The ACC your daughters team is better than all other teams. It has been pointed out that in normal years many teams beat ACC teams. If you can not understand that this year is not a normal year I don’t know what to tell you. At the end of the day the past year and a half will be a blip on the history of the sport and know for the Covid craziness.

Maybe they can stack their teams with more grad students next year also.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“ I could be wrong but it appears that only the ACC is the only conference with multiple teams in the tournament that do not have conference opponents in the same bracket.”
What the what ? You are truly pathetic “everyone agrees that the ACC is a good conference” , you can’t even say the words that the ACC is the best conference for lacrosse in both men’s and women’s . You clowns keep bringing up previous years results from many years ago to try and make predictions about this years teams , it’s a ridiculously obtuse argument from if I were a betting man a ridiculously jealous parent who realizes his kids conference is essentially 13th grade.

I have not seen where anyone has made any predictions nor have I read any post claiming the ACC is not the best conference. The only thing that has been pointed out is that not all ACC Teams are created equal and that there have always been many teams that are able to complete with the ACC teams. You obviously believe that by being in The ACC your daughters team is better than all other teams. It has been pointed out that in normal years many teams beat ACC teams. If you can not understand that this year is not a normal year I don’t know what to tell you. At the end of the day the past year and a half will be a blip on the history of the sport and know for the Covid craziness.

Just when I thought you could not get anymore pathetic you prove me wrong. How sad that you are already trying to diminish the accomplishment of which ever team wins. In actuality winning the championship this season will be an even more difficult task than any prior season in my opinion. Dealing with Covid is hard enough and these young women have had to sacrifice more this year than any other and the fact that many of these teams are much deeper than previous years makes winning it this year an amazing accomplishment. You sadly keep bringing up that in the past ...blah blah, we are talking about this year. If you think 5-10 years from now when one of these players proudly tells their son or daughter that they were a member of the 2021 national championship team that their accomplishment should be diminished because of covid it says more about you than their accomplishment.
To change the subject lets see if anyone has some upset predictions for the weekend,

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“ I could be wrong but it appears that only the ACC is the only conference with multiple teams in the tournament that do not have conference opponents in the same bracket.”
What the what ? You are truly pathetic “everyone agrees that the ACC is a good conference” , you can’t even say the words that the ACC is the best conference for lacrosse in both men’s and women’s . You clowns keep bringing up previous years results from many years ago to try and make predictions about this years teams , it’s a ridiculously obtuse argument from if I were a betting man a ridiculously jealous parent who realizes his kids conference is essentially 13th grade.

I have not seen where anyone has made any predictions nor have I read any post claiming the ACC is not the best conference. The only thing that has been pointed out is that not all ACC Teams are created equal and that there have always been many teams that are able to complete with the ACC teams. You obviously believe that by being in The ACC your daughters team is better than all other teams. It has been pointed out that in normal years many teams beat ACC teams. If you can not understand that this year is not a normal year I don’t know what to tell you. At the end of the day the past year and a half will be a blip on the history of the sport and know for the Covid craziness.

Just when I thought you could not get anymore pathetic you prove me wrong. How sad that you are already trying to diminish the accomplishment of which ever team wins. In actuality winning the championship this season will be an even more difficult task than any prior season in my opinion. Dealing with Covid is hard enough and these young women have had to sacrifice more this year than any other and the fact that many of these teams are much deeper than previous years makes winning it this year an amazing accomplishment. You sadly keep bringing up that in the past ...blah blah, we are talking about this year. If you think 5-10 years from now when one of these players proudly tells their son or daughter that they were a member of the 2021 national championship team that their accomplishment should be diminished because of covid it says more about you than their accomplishment.
To change the subject lets see if anyone has some upset predictions for the weekend,

Wow, very sensitive. Nobody diminished anything. Pointing out that it is not normal is not diminishing... this year several teams that would normally play and many times beat ACC teams did not play them so it is not normal. Covid has had different affects on different teams, but they all deal with it.

https://usalaxmagazine.com/college/...-ncaa-division-i-womens-lacrosse-bracket

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“ I could be wrong but it appears that only the ACC is the only conference with multiple teams in the tournament that do not have conference opponents in the same bracket.”
What the what ? You are truly pathetic “everyone agrees that the ACC is a good conference” , you can’t even say the words that the ACC is the best conference for lacrosse in both men’s and women’s . You clowns keep bringing up previous years results from many years ago to try and make predictions about this years teams , it’s a ridiculously obtuse argument from if I were a betting man a ridiculously jealous parent who realizes his kids conference is essentially 13th grade.

I have not seen where anyone has made any predictions nor have I read any post claiming the ACC is not the best conference. The only thing that has been pointed out is that not all ACC Teams are created equal and that there have always been many teams that are able to complete with the ACC teams. You obviously believe that by being in The ACC your daughters team is better than all other teams. It has been pointed out that in normal years many teams beat ACC teams. If you can not understand that this year is not a normal year I don’t know what to tell you. At the end of the day the past year and a half will be a blip on the history of the sport and know for the Covid craziness.

Just when I thought you could not get anymore pathetic you prove me wrong. How sad that you are already trying to diminish the accomplishment of which ever team wins. In actuality winning the championship this season will be an even more difficult task than any prior season in my opinion. Dealing with Covid is hard enough and these young women have had to sacrifice more this year than any other and the fact that many of these teams are much deeper than previous years makes winning it this year an amazing accomplishment. You sadly keep bringing up that in the past ...blah blah, we are talking about this year. If you think 5-10 years from now when one of these players proudly tells their son or daughter that they were a member of the 2021 national championship team that their accomplishment should be diminished because of covid it says more about you than their accomplishment.
To change the subject lets see if anyone has some upset predictions for the weekend,

Wow, very sensitive. Nobody diminished anything. Pointing out that it is not normal is not diminishing... this year several teams that would normally play and many times beat ACC teams did not play them so it is not normal. Covid has had different affects on different teams, but they all deal with it.

You clearly were attempting to diminish whoever wins it this year and if you cannot see that my advice to the guy you are responding to would simply be let go of what you can't fix. My pick for an early upset would be Loyola over Cuse as I believe Cuse would be heavily favored at home against a team they dominated early in the season ,injuries to cuse and Loyola getting better thru out the season makes for an upset.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“ I could be wrong but it appears that only the ACC is the only conference with multiple teams in the tournament that do not have conference opponents in the same bracket.”
What the what ? You are truly pathetic “everyone agrees that the ACC is a good conference” , you can’t even say the words that the ACC is the best conference for lacrosse in both men’s and women’s . You clowns keep bringing up previous years results from many years ago to try and make predictions about this years teams , it’s a ridiculously obtuse argument from if I were a betting man a ridiculously jealous parent who realizes his kids conference is essentially 13th grade.

I have not seen where anyone has made any predictions nor have I read any post claiming the ACC is not the best conference. The only thing that has been pointed out is that not all ACC Teams are created equal and that there have always been many teams that are able to complete with the ACC teams. You obviously believe that by being in The ACC your daughters team is better than all other teams. It has been pointed out that in normal years many teams beat ACC teams. If you can not understand that this year is not a normal year I don’t know what to tell you. At the end of the day the past year and a half will be a blip on the history of the sport and know for the Covid craziness.

Just when I thought you could not get anymore pathetic you prove me wrong. How sad that you are already trying to diminish the accomplishment of which ever team wins. In actuality winning the championship this season will be an even more difficult task than any prior season in my opinion. Dealing with Covid is hard enough and these young women have had to sacrifice more this year than any other and the fact that many of these teams are much deeper than previous years makes winning it this year an amazing accomplishment. You sadly keep bringing up that in the past ...blah blah, we are talking about this year. If you think 5-10 years from now when one of these players proudly tells their son or daughter that they were a member of the 2021 national championship team that their accomplishment should be diminished because of covid it says more about you than their accomplishment.
To change the subject lets see if anyone has some upset predictions for the weekend,

Wow, very sensitive. Nobody diminished anything. Pointing out that it is not normal is not diminishing... this year several teams that would normally play and many times beat ACC teams did not play them so it is not normal. Covid has had different affects on different teams, but they all deal with it.

You clearly were attempting to diminish whoever wins it this year and if you cannot see that my advice to the guy you are responding to would simply be let go of what you can't fix. My pick for an early upset would be Loyola over Cuse as I believe Cuse would be heavily favored at home against a team they dominated early in the season ,injuries to cuse and Loyola getting better thru out the season makes for an upset.

Disagree, nobody clearly diminished anyone except for the joker who believes every team/conference with the exception of the ACC is 13th grade. The reality is that in "Normal Years" it is only the top 2 ACC teams that dominate. In normal years there are a number of programs that compete with and beat ACC teams during the regular season as well as in the Tournament, they do not knock each other off.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“ I could be wrong but it appears that only the ACC is the only conference with multiple teams in the tournament that do not have conference opponents in the same bracket.”
What the what ? You are truly pathetic “everyone agrees that the ACC is a good conference” , you can’t even say the words that the ACC is the best conference for lacrosse in both men’s and women’s . You clowns keep bringing up previous years results from many years ago to try and make predictions about this years teams , it’s a ridiculously obtuse argument from if I were a betting man a ridiculously jealous parent who realizes his kids conference is essentially 13th grade.

I have not seen where anyone has made any predictions nor have I read any post claiming the ACC is not the best conference. The only thing that has been pointed out is that not all ACC Teams are created equal and that there have always been many teams that are able to complete with the ACC teams. You obviously believe that by being in The ACC your daughters team is better than all other teams. It has been pointed out that in normal years many teams beat ACC teams. If you can not understand that this year is not a normal year I don’t know what to tell you. At the end of the day the past year and a half will be a blip on the history of the sport and know for the Covid craziness.

Just when I thought you could not get anymore pathetic you prove me wrong. How sad that you are already trying to diminish the accomplishment of which ever team wins. In actuality winning the championship this season will be an even more difficult task than any prior season in my opinion. Dealing with Covid is hard enough and these young women have had to sacrifice more this year than any other and the fact that many of these teams are much deeper than previous years makes winning it this year an amazing accomplishment. You sadly keep bringing up that in the past ...blah blah, we are talking about this year. If you think 5-10 years from now when one of these players proudly tells their son or daughter that they were a member of the 2021 national championship team that their accomplishment should be diminished because of covid it says more about you than their accomplishment.
To change the subject lets see if anyone has some upset predictions for the weekend,

Wow, very sensitive. Nobody diminished anything. Pointing out that it is not normal is not diminishing... this year several teams that would normally play and many times beat ACC teams did not play them so it is not normal. Covid has had different affects on different teams, but they all deal with it.

You clearly were attempting to diminish whoever wins it this year and if you cannot see that my advice to the guy you are responding to would simply be let go of what you can't fix. My pick for an early upset would be Loyola over Cuse as I believe Cuse would be heavily favored at home against a team they dominated early in the season ,injuries to cuse and Loyola getting better thru out the season makes for an upset.

The injuries to Cuse players hasn't effected their play. They have plenty of talent - they don't depend or rely on 1 or 2 players - something you can't say about alot of teams

--- "The injuries to Cuse players hasn't effected their play. They have plenty of talent - they don't depend or rely on 1 or 2 players - something you can't say about alot of teams"---

What team relies on 1 or 2 players? Last time I checked this is a team sport and there are 12 players on the field for each team. Your statement illustrates one of the things that is wrong with this sport, "Parents who can only see value in scoring goals". Many teams have to deal with injuries every year and there are a lot of teams with plenty of talent.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

--- "The injuries to Cuse players hasn't effected their play. They have plenty of talent - they don't depend or rely on 1 or 2 players - something you can't say about alot of teams"---

What team relies on 1 or 2 players? Last time I checked this is a team sport and there are 12 players on the field for each team. Your statement illustrates one of the things that is wrong with this sport, "Parents who can only see value in scoring goals". Many teams have to deal with injuries every year and there are a lot of teams with plenty of talent.

You are so right, UNC has the best offense by far but they would not be undefeated without their defense/goalie

Originally Posted by Anonymous

--- "The injuries to Cuse players hasn't effected their play. They have plenty of talent - they don't depend or rely on 1 or 2 players - something you can't say about alot of teams"---

What team relies on 1 or 2 players? Last time I checked this is a team sport and there are 12 players on the field for each team. Your statement illustrates one of the things that is wrong with this sport, "Parents who can only see value in scoring goals". Many teams have to deal with injuries every year and there are a lot of teams with plenty of talent.

You are so right, UNC has the best offense by far but they would not be undefeated without their defense/goalie

More times than not (just about all of the time) it is the team with the best Team Defense and solid goalie play that wins The Championship. UNC Midfielders are pretty darn good as well.

“Disagree, nobody clearly diminished anyone except for the joker who believes every team/conference with the exception of the ACC is 13th grade. The reality is that in "Normal Years" it is only the top 2 ACC teams that dominate. In normal years there are a number of programs that compete with and beat ACC teams during the regular season as well as in the Tournament, they do not knock each other off.”

You again keep going back in history the poster has clearly been talking about this year and obviously believes the ACC is stacked this year as do I . Is it because of grad transfers or better funding or seniors taking the extra year , I don’t know but they seem to have many top teams and yes I struggle to name teams this year that would be more competitive than Notre Dame has been in the ACC . You should tell him a few of the teams now before they play some of the ACC teams in the tournament .

I

Originally Posted by Anonymous

--- "The injuries to Cuse players hasn't effected their play. They have plenty of talent - they don't depend or rely on 1 or 2 players - something you can't say about alot of teams"---

What team relies on 1 or 2 players? Last time I checked this is a team sport and there are 12 players on the field for each team. Your statement illustrates one of the things that is wrong with this sport, "Parents who can only see value in scoring goals". Many teams have to deal with injuries every year and there are a lot of teams with plenty of talent.

You are so right, UNC has the best offense by far but they would not be undefeated without their defense/goalie

More times than not (just about all of the time) it is the team with the best Team Defense and solid goalie play that wins The Championship. UNC Midfielders are pretty darn good as well.

While that’s a nice sentiment I am not sure that’s actually true . Looking at some past years results there have been a few shoot outs and I don’t really count the pre-shot clock low scoring games as being about defense as much as stalling in many cases . I think a well balanced team is what gets you thru the whole tournament .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Disagree, nobody clearly diminished anyone except for the joker who believes every team/conference with the exception of the ACC is 13th grade. The reality is that in "Normal Years" it is only the top 2 ACC teams that dominate. In normal years there are a number of programs that compete with and beat ACC teams during the regular season as well as in the Tournament, they do not knock each other off.”

You again keep going back in history the poster has clearly been talking about this year and obviously believes the ACC is stacked this year as do I . Is it because of grad transfers or better funding or seniors taking the extra year , I don’t know but they seem to have many top teams and yes I struggle to name teams this year that would be more competitive than Notre Dame has been in the ACC . You should tell him a few of the teams now before they play some of the ACC teams in the tournament .

Not the only person responding... I think the point has been made that "this year" is not normal, Very limited cross-over games. In addition to the fact that many traditional top 20 teams have not competed against ACC Teams this year the ACC teams are not all equal. The "ACC Poster" would like us all to believe that all of the ACC teams are dominant and that all other teams with the exception of Northwestern are as he said 13th grade. At the end of the day, we will never know because this in not a "normal year". Opinions are just that, Opinions. Historical perspective is actual reality based on what has actually happened. We will never know about this year because it has been so screwed up. The bottom line is that Louisville is not North Carolina and when we look at what has actually happened over the years there are many teams that can and do compete with and beat ACC Teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I

Originally Posted by Anonymous

--- "The injuries to Cuse players hasn't effected their play. They have plenty of talent - they don't depend or rely on 1 or 2 players - something you can't say about alot of teams"---

What team relies on 1 or 2 players? Last time I checked this is a team sport and there are 12 players on the field for each team. Your statement illustrates one of the things that is wrong with this sport, "Parents who can only see value in scoring goals". Many teams have to deal with injuries every year and there are a lot of teams with plenty of talent.

You are so right, UNC has the best offense by far but they would not be undefeated without their defense/goalie

More times than not (just about all of the time) it is the team with the best Team Defense and solid goalie play that wins The Championship. UNC Midfielders are pretty darn good as well.

While that’s a nice sentiment I am not sure that’s actually true . Looking at some past years results there have been a few shoot outs and I don’t really count the pre-shot clock low scoring games as being about defense as much as stalling in many cases . I think a well balanced team is what gets you thru the whole tournament .

Just another person who spouts nonsense with no basis on reality, facts or actual results. Each of the past 6 National Championships were won by teams that held their opponents to fewer goals than their season average. Team Defense and Good / Great Goaltending is what wins championships.

2014 National Championship: Maryland over Syracuse. Syracuse held to 12 goals, their season average was 14.4.
2015 National Championship: Maryland over UNC. UNC held to 8 goals, their season average was 13.5.
2016 National Championship: UNC over Maryland. Maryland held to 7 goals, their season average was 14.7.
2017 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 13v goals, their season average was 16.
2018 National Championship: JMU over BC. BC held to 15 goals, their season average was 15.7
2019 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 10 goals, their season average was 16.8.

Shot Clock or no Shot Clock, it is Defense that wins championships. There were no "shoot outs" and BTW, most would consider "stalling" a defensive tactic. Also 5 of the 6 years the team that won The National Championship played Man to Man Defense.... JMU an aberration on many fronts....

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I

Originally Posted by Anonymous

--- "The injuries to Cuse players hasn't effected their play. They have plenty of talent - they don't depend or rely on 1 or 2 players - something you can't say about alot of teams"---

What team relies on 1 or 2 players? Last time I checked this is a team sport and there are 12 players on the field for each team. Your statement illustrates one of the things that is wrong with this sport, "Parents who can only see value in scoring goals". Many teams have to deal with injuries every year and there are a lot of teams with plenty of talent.

You are so right, UNC has the best offense by far but they would not be undefeated without their defense/goalie

More times than not (just about all of the time) it is the team with the best Team Defense and solid goalie play that wins The Championship. UNC Midfielders are pretty darn good as well.

While that’s a nice sentiment I am not sure that’s actually true . Looking at some past years results there have been a few shoot outs and I don’t really count the pre-shot clock low scoring games as being about defense as much as stalling in many cases . I think a well balanced team is what gets you thru the whole tournament .

Just another person who spouts nonsense with no basis on reality, facts or actual results. Each of the past 6 National Championships were won by teams that held their opponents to fewer goals than their season average. Team Defense and Good / Great Goaltending is what wins championships.

2014 National Championship: Maryland over Syracuse. Syracuse held to 12 goals, their season average was 14.4.
2015 National Championship: Maryland over UNC. UNC held to 8 goals, their season average was 13.5.
2016 National Championship: UNC over Maryland. Maryland held to 7 goals, their season average was 14.7.
2017 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 13v goals, their season average was 16.
2018 National Championship: JMU over BC. BC held to 15 goals, their season average was 15.7
2019 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 10 goals, their season average was 16.8.

Shot Clock or no Shot Clock, it is Defense that wins championships. There were no "shoot outs" and BTW, most would consider "stalling" a defensive tactic. Also 5 of the 6 years the team that won The National Championship played Man to Man Defense.... JMU an aberration on many fronts....

Pitching beats hitting.... ;-)

All this Big10 and ACC chest pounding is getting old. Crazy parents trying to lump their kid's team in with whatever conference, to somehow validate how good their team is? Here are the facts over the last 15 years... Big 10 has had two teams dominate, Northwestern and Maryland. They combined to win 12 of the last 15 championships. The rest of the BIG 10 has fallen short. ACC has won 2 championships in the last 15 years, both thanks to UNC, the rest of the ACC has fallen short. There is NU, MD and UNC, all the other teams just play in the same conference with them. Go win a championship then you can come back on here and pound your chest.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

All this Big10 and ACC chest pounding is getting old. Crazy parents trying to lump their kid's team in with whatever conference, to somehow validate how good their team is? Here are the facts over the last 15 years... Big 10 has had two teams dominate, Northwestern and Maryland. They combined to win 12 of the last 15 championships. The rest of the BIG 10 has fallen short. ACC has won 2 championships in the last 15 years, both thanks to UNC, the rest of the ACC has fallen short. There is NU, MD and UNC, all the other teams just play in the same conference with them. Go win a championship then you can come back on here and pound your chest.

Have not seen any Big 10 chest pounding, although I have read several posts attempting to diminish The Big 10. The Big 10 women’s lacrosse conference was only established in 2015. Maryland was formerly an ACC Member Institution. Prior to the Big 10 women’s Lacrosse Conference Northwestern, Penn State, Hopkins and OSU were in The ALC...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

All this Big10 and ACC chest pounding is getting old. Crazy parents trying to lump their kid's team in with whatever conference, to somehow validate how good their team is? Here are the facts over the last 15 years... Big 10 has had two teams dominate, Northwestern and Maryland. They combined to win 12 of the last 15 championships. The rest of the BIG 10 has fallen short. ACC has won 2 championships in the last 15 years, both thanks to UNC, the rest of the ACC has fallen short. There is NU, MD and UNC, all the other teams just play in the same conference with them. Go win a championship then you can come back on here and pound your chest.

Have not seen any Big 10 chest pounding, although I have read several posts attempting to diminish The Big 10. The Big 10 women’s lacrosse conference was only established in 2015. Maryland was formerly an ACC Member Institution. Prior to the Big 10 women’s Lacrosse Conference Northwestern, Penn State, Hopkins and OSU were in The ALC...

Boston College went to the Championship game 3 times in recent years and Penn State went to 2 Final Fours in recent years...

Automatic qualifying great for field of 64 in basketball. Not very good for field of 29 in women’s lax. Most of fridays games were not close to competitive. Need to re think this in future. It isn’t growing the game.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Automatic qualifying great for field of 64 in basketball. Not very good for field of 29 in women’s lax. Most of fridays games were not close to competitive. Need to re think this in future. It isn’t growing the game.

Yeah, but I do not see it changing. There were a handful of good competitive games, hopefully the majority of second round games will be competitive. Denver and Stanford both looked good, not sure how Denver will do vs NU. The only two upsets I see for second round are Rutgers over SBU and possibly Maryland over Duke. Don’t think Loyola is strong enough to beat SU. JMU has come on strong so who knows? Anything is possible. Florida not going to let it happen again. I think ND handles UVA. BC should be fine.

Ok. The time has come for instant replay and as basketball has done flopping needs to become a yellow card. It is getting ridiculous the grabbing of the head when the stick doesn’t hit you. Every other major college sport has it. Almost all games are streamed now. If the ref can’t get a good angle then play stands as called. But this weekends games my god it was terrible after seeing it on replay. Also, stepping in front of shots after your beat is ridiculous as well.if you move into the path of the ball it is not a yellow-sorry. Refs need to do a much better job with this call.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Ok. The time has come for instant replay and as basketball has done flopping needs to become a yellow card. It is getting ridiculous the grabbing of the head when the stick doesn’t hit you. Every other major college sport has it. Almost all games are streamed now. If the ref can’t get a good angle then play stands as called. But this weekends games my god it was terrible after seeing it on replay. Also, stepping in front of shots after your beat is ridiculous as well.if you move into the path of the ball it is not a yellow-sorry. Refs need to do a much better job with this call.

Can you imagne how slow this game would be with instant replay. There are at least 5 referee huddles in every game that delays play already. The one thing I would like to see change is the fact that a player must be in a shooting position in the 8 meter in order to be awarded a free position. So many times there is a bad feed in the middle or a loose ball in the 8 meter and some sort of foul is called on the defense. So now they get a free position and the ball was not even in their stick when the foul occured. I would also give the defense a little leeway when a girl tries to dodge and gets surrounded by 3-4 defenders. It is a foul 99.9% of the time on the defense leading to another free position.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Automatic qualifying great for field of 64 in basketball. Not very good for field of 29 in women’s lax. Most of fridays games were not close to competitive. Need to re think this in future. It isn’t growing the game.

Yeah, but I do not see it changing. There were a handful of good competitive games, hopefully the majority of second round games will be competitive. Denver and Stanford both looked good, not sure how Denver will do vs NU. The only two upsets I see for second round are Rutgers over SBU and possibly Maryland over Duke. Don’t think Loyola is strong enough to beat SU. JMU has come on strong so who knows? Anything is possible. Florida not going to let it happen again. I think ND handles UVA. BC should be fine.

Miss on the Rutgers upset watch... Maryland almost pulled it off. All in all games went as expected. Stony Brook looked good too bad JMU had to play UNC... they might have advanced, they have been getting better all year, looked good vs UNC.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Automatic qualifying great for field of 64 in basketball. Not very good for field of 29 in women’s lax. Most of fridays games were not close to competitive. Need to re think this in future. It isn’t growing the game.

Yeah, but I do not see it changing. There were a handful of good competitive games, hopefully the majority of second round games will be competitive. Denver and Stanford both looked good, not sure how Denver will do vs NU. The only two upsets I see for second round are Rutgers over SBU and possibly Maryland over Duke. Don’t think Loyola is strong enough to beat SU. JMU has come on strong so who knows? Anything is possible. Florida not going to let it happen again. I think ND handles UVA. BC should be fine.

Miss on the Rutgers upset watch... Maryland almost pulled it off. All in all games went as expected. Stony Brook looked good too bad JMU had to play UNC... they might have advanced, they have been getting better all year, looked good vs UNC.

UNC and JMU both were dealt a bad hand having to play each other in the second round. Levy said as much in her post game comments. It did not have to be that way even when factoring in geography for unseeded teams, but the committee seemed to deliberately spare ACC teams from facing UNC before the final four. Now UNC gets SBU which should have been seeded over Duke. Watch out, though, UNC will be battle tested if they make it to championship game. Based on first two rounds: UNC, BC and SU are deserving of top four seeding. Big ten had some good but not great teams other than NU. A little surprised Rutgers was not more competitive with SBU which I think points to SBU deserving 5-7 seeding. It's too bad their conference schedule is never strong, and they don't get the benefit of the doubt like some other programs do.

More times than not (just about all of the time) it is the team with the best Team Defense and solid goalie play that wins The Championship. UNC Midfielders are pretty darn good as well.[/quote]

While that’s a nice sentiment I am not sure that’s actually true . Looking at some past years results there have been a few shoot outs and I don’t really count the pre-shot clock low scoring games as being about defense as much as stalling in many cases . I think a well balanced team is what gets you thru the whole tournament .[/quote]

Just another person who spouts nonsense with no basis on reality, facts or actual results. Each of the past 6 National Championships were won by teams that held their opponents to fewer goals than their season average. Team Defense and Good / Great Goaltending is what wins championships.

2014 National Championship: Maryland over Syracuse. Syracuse held to 12 goals, their season average was 14.4.
2015 National Championship: Maryland over UNC. UNC held to 8 goals, their season average was 13.5.
2016 National Championship: UNC over Maryland. Maryland held to 7 goals, their season average was 14.7.
2017 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 13v goals, their season average was 16.
2018 National Championship: JMU over BC. BC held to 15 goals, their season average was 15.7
2019 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 10 goals, their season average was 16.8.

Shot Clock or no Shot Clock, it is Defense that wins championships. There were no "shoot outs" and BTW, most would consider "stalling" a defensive tactic. Also 5 of the 6 years the team that won The National Championship played Man to Man Defense.... JMU an aberration on many fronts....[/quote]

You really are a bit slow and spouted so many nonsensical points its difficult to keep up.. You are trying to use stats from a single game to decide where a teams strengths are and anyone who has even a bit of statistical knowledge knows that makes no sense. Lets look at those teams over the course of their season to see where they stacked up.
offense defense
2016 UNC 5 25
2017 MD 1 17
2018 11 6
2019 5 5

Your attempt to try and credit a teams defense when their offensive teammates are stalling is sad. Looks like a top ten offense is a better predictor of success than your desperate attempt to say only defense matters . Again well balanced teams win the championship .

Different subject but was at SB game this weekend and heard TO was invited to team women’s senior USA tryout coming up in June. Person said US lacrosse invited 15 more kids to tryout last week via email. I didn’t see this announcement of new players being selected to tryout on there website. Anybody know any additional kids trying out. Why wouldn’t US lax announce these additions?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

More times than not (just about all of the time) it is the team with the best Team Defense and solid goalie play that wins The Championship. UNC Midfielders are pretty darn good as well.

While that’s a nice sentiment I am not sure that’s actually true . Looking at some past years results there have been a few shoot outs and I don’t really count the pre-shot clock low scoring games as being about defense as much as stalling in many cases . I think a well balanced team is what gets you thru the whole tournament .[/quote]

Just another person who spouts nonsense with no basis on reality, facts or actual results. Each of the past 6 National Championships were won by teams that held their opponents to fewer goals than their season average. Team Defense and Good / Great Goaltending is what wins championships.

2014 National Championship: Maryland over Syracuse. Syracuse held to 12 goals, their season average was 14.4.
2015 National Championship: Maryland over UNC. UNC held to 8 goals, their season average was 13.5.
2016 National Championship: UNC over Maryland. Maryland held to 7 goals, their season average was 14.7.
2017 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 13v goals, their season average was 16.
2018 National Championship: JMU over BC. BC held to 15 goals, their season average was 15.7
2019 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 10 goals, their season average was 16.8.

Shot Clock or no Shot Clock, it is Defense that wins championships. There were no "shoot outs" and BTW, most would consider "stalling" a defensive tactic. Also 5 of the 6 years the team that won The National Championship played Man to Man Defense.... JMU an aberration on many fronts....[/quote]

You really are a bit slow and spouted so many nonsensical points its difficult to keep up.. You are trying to use stats from a single game to decide where a teams strengths are and anyone who has even a bit of statistical knowledge knows that makes no sense. Lets look at those teams over the course of their season to see where they stacked up.
offense defense
2016 UNC 5 25
2017 MD 1 17
2018 11 6
2019 5 5

Your attempt to try and credit a teams defense when their offensive teammates are stalling is sad. Looks like a top ten offense is a better predictor of success than your desperate attempt to say only defense matters . Again well balanced teams win the championship .[/quote]

Trying to use statistics to make a point when discussing DI Women's Lacrosse is useless because of the inherent lack of parity. Strength of schedule varies to such a great degree that trying to use goals for and goals against to compare teams simply does not work.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Different subject but was at SB game this weekend and heard TO was invited to team women’s senior USA tryout coming up in June. Person said US lacrosse invited 15 more kids to tryout last week via email. I didn’t see this announcement of new players being selected to tryout on there website. Anybody know any additional kids trying out. Why wouldn’t US lax announce these additions?

https://www.usalacrosse.com/us-womens-player-pool

TO is not on this list, individual said that additions were
Contacted last week.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

More times than not (just about all of the time) it is the team with the best Team Defense and solid goalie play that wins The Championship. UNC Midfielders are pretty darn good as well.

While that’s a nice sentiment I am not sure that’s actually true . Looking at some past years results there have been a few shoot outs and I don’t really count the pre-shot clock low scoring games as being about defense as much as stalling in many cases . I think a well balanced team is what gets you thru the whole tournament .[/quote]

Just another person who spouts nonsense with no basis on reality, facts or actual results. Each of the past 6 National Championships were won by teams that held their opponents to fewer goals than their season average. Team Defense and Good / Great Goaltending is what wins championships.

2014 National Championship: Maryland over Syracuse. Syracuse held to 12 goals, their season average was 14.4.
2015 National Championship: Maryland over UNC. UNC held to 8 goals, their season average was 13.5.
2016 National Championship: UNC over Maryland. Maryland held to 7 goals, their season average was 14.7.
2017 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 13v goals, their season average was 16.
2018 National Championship: JMU over BC. BC held to 15 goals, their season average was 15.7
2019 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 10 goals, their season average was 16.8.

Shot Clock or no Shot Clock, it is Defense that wins championships. There were no "shoot outs" and BTW, most would consider "stalling" a defensive tactic. Also 5 of the 6 years the team that won The National Championship played Man to Man Defense.... JMU an aberration on many fronts....[/quote]

You really are a bit slow and spouted so many nonsensical points its difficult to keep up.. You are trying to use stats from a single game to decide where a teams strengths are and anyone who has even a bit of statistical knowledge knows that makes no sense. Lets look at those teams over the course of their season to see where they stacked up.
offense defense
2016 UNC 5 25
2017 MD 1 17
2018 11 6
2019 5 5

Your attempt to try and credit a teams defense when their offensive teammates are stalling is sad. Looks like a top ten offense is a better predictor of success than your desperate attempt to say only defense matters . Again well balanced teams win the championship .[/quote]

No, a team doesn’t simply need to be “well balanced” in order to win, the team needs to be exceptional at every position. That said, I will bet on the team that plays the best defense.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

More times than not (just about all of the time) it is the team with the best Team Defense and solid goalie play that wins The Championship. UNC Midfielders are pretty darn good as well.

While that’s a nice sentiment I am not sure that’s actually true . Looking at some past years results there have been a few shoot outs and I don’t really count the pre-shot clock low scoring games as being about defense as much as stalling in many cases . I think a well balanced team is what gets you thru the whole tournament .

Just another person who spouts nonsense with no basis on reality, facts or actual results. Each of the past 6 National Championships were won by teams that held their opponents to fewer goals than their season average. Team Defense and Good / Great Goaltending is what wins championships.

2014 National Championship: Maryland over Syracuse. Syracuse held to 12 goals, their season average was 14.4.
2015 National Championship: Maryland over UNC. UNC held to 8 goals, their season average was 13.5.
2016 National Championship: UNC over Maryland. Maryland held to 7 goals, their season average was 14.7.
2017 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 13v goals, their season average was 16.
2018 National Championship: JMU over BC. BC held to 15 goals, their season average was 15.7
2019 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 10 goals, their season average was 16.8.

Shot Clock or no Shot Clock, it is Defense that wins championships. There were no "shoot outs" and BTW, most would consider "stalling" a defensive tactic. Also 5 of the 6 years the team that won The National Championship played Man to Man Defense.... JMU an aberration on many fronts....[/quote]

You really are a bit slow and spouted so many nonsensical points its difficult to keep up.. You are trying to use stats from a single game to decide where a teams strengths are and anyone who has even a bit of statistical knowledge knows that makes no sense. Lets look at those teams over the course of their season to see where they stacked up.
offense defense
2016 UNC 5 25
2017 MD 1 17
2018 11 6
2019 5 5

Your attempt to try and credit a teams defense when their offensive teammates are stalling is sad. Looks like a top ten offense is a better predictor of success than your desperate attempt to say only defense matters . Again well balanced teams win the championship .[/quote]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trying to use statistics to make a point when discussing DI Women's Lacrosse is useless because of the inherent lack of parity. Strength of schedule varies to such a great degree that trying to use goals for and goals against to compare teams simply does not work.[/quote]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Every year there are a lot of "Well Balanced" teams that do not win the championships.... As the post above points out, Team statistics such as goals for and goals against are not relevant in women's lacrosse.... You call a guy slow, yet you admit that you are having difficulty keeping up :-) .... The "single game" stats were not used to "decide where a teams strengths are", they were in order to illustrate that in that particular game "The championship game" the team that won was able to hold their opponent to fewer goals than they normally scored that year.... Nobody tried to credit a "teams defense" when their offense was stalling, just pointing out that most people would consider stalling a "defensive tactic"..... Nobody said "only defense matters", Obviously offense is important, It's just not as important as Defense when it come to winning championships.....

Originally Posted by Anonymous

More times than not (just about all of the time) it is the team with the best Team Defense and solid goalie play that wins The Championship. UNC Midfielders are pretty darn good as well.

While that’s a nice sentiment I am not sure that’s actually true . Looking at some past years results there have been a few shoot outs and I don’t really count the pre-shot clock low scoring games as being about defense as much as stalling in many cases . I think a well balanced team is what gets you thru the whole tournament .

Just another person who spouts nonsense with no basis on reality, facts or actual results. Each of the past 6 National Championships were won by teams that held their opponents to fewer goals than their season average. Team Defense and Good / Great Goaltending is what wins championships.

2014 National Championship: Maryland over Syracuse. Syracuse held to 12 goals, their season average was 14.4.
2015 National Championship: Maryland over UNC. UNC held to 8 goals, their season average was 13.5.
2016 National Championship: UNC over Maryland. Maryland held to 7 goals, their season average was 14.7.
2017 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 13v goals, their season average was 16.
2018 National Championship: JMU over BC. BC held to 15 goals, their season average was 15.7
2019 National Championship: Maryland over BC. BC held to 10 goals, their season average was 16.8.

Shot Clock or no Shot Clock, it is Defense that wins championships. There were no "shoot outs" and BTW, most would consider "stalling" a defensive tactic. Also 5 of the 6 years the team that won The National Championship played Man to Man Defense.... JMU an aberration on many fronts....

You really are a bit slow and spouted so many nonsensical points its difficult to keep up.. You are trying to use stats from a single game to decide where a teams strengths are and anyone who has even a bit of statistical knowledge knows that makes no sense. Lets look at those teams over the course of their season to see where they stacked up.
offense defense
2016 UNC 5 25
2017 MD 1 17
2018 11 6
2019 5 5

Your attempt to try and credit a teams defense when their offensive teammates are stalling is sad. Looks like a top ten offense is a better predictor of success than your desperate attempt to say only defense matters . Again well balanced teams win the championship .[/quote]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trying to use statistics to make a point when discussing DI Women's Lacrosse is useless because of the inherent lack of parity. Strength of schedule varies to such a great degree that trying to use goals for and goals against to compare teams simply does not work.[/quote]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Every year there are a lot of "Well Balanced" teams that do not win the championships.... As the post above points out, Team statistics such as goals for and goals against are not relevant in women's lacrosse.... You call a guy slow, yet you admit that you are having difficulty keeping up :-) .... The "single game" stats were not used to "decide where a teams strengths are", they were in order to illustrate that in that particular game "The championship game" the team that won was able to hold their opponent to fewer goals than they normally scored that year.... Nobody tried to credit a "teams defense" when their offense was stalling, just pointing out that most people would consider stalling a "defensive tactic"..... Nobody said "only defense matters", Obviously offense is important, It's just not as important as Defense when it come to winning championships.....[/quote]

Wow that is sadly pathetic. Yes not every well balanced team wins the championship nor does every team with an excellent defense .You say team statistics don't matter in women's lacrosse ( an absurd argument) and yet your one post was almost strictly based on statistics. Yes you are slow and its difficult to keep up with how many nonsensical arguments you attempt to make. The above stats clearly indicate that many of those championship teams would have offenses that are considered elite while having defenses that would be considered very good but not elite.Your boyfriends argument about strength of schedule is also foolish as I did not compare two different teams against one another but a single teams offense vs their defense for the year so the strength of schedule is exacting the same.
So your defender daughter who wanted to play offense but did not have the stick skills for it does not get the recognition you feel she deserves. Time to get over it ,there is a reason your kid got stuck on defense .

It looks as though in this discussion, statistics are being used in two different ways. One is trying to use cumulative offense & defense ranking for the season, the other is using numbers from the championship game (goals allowed). I do agree with the point that statistics as well as a teams record can not be used to compare or rank teams in this sport.
The argument that the team that plays the best defense in the championship game or holds their opponent to fewer goals than they normally score sounds like a solid argument.

You lose all credibility with your ad hominem attacks, they signal that your argument is weak and not based on anything other than you opinion. You have also identified yourself as the type of person who makes this sport so toxic. In the end, the team that wins will most likely be the team that gets great goalie play, plays great defense (including the Mids), re-defends well and controls the middle of the field (in transition and on the draw).

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It looks as though in this discussion, statistics are being used in two different ways. One is trying to use cumulative offense & defense ranking for the season, the other is using numbers from the championship game (goals allowed). I do agree with the point that statistics as well as a teams record can not be used to compare or rank teams in this sport.
The argument that the team that plays the best defense in the championship game or holds their opponent to fewer goals than they normally score sounds like a solid argument.

You lose all credibility with your ad hominem attacks, they signal that your argument is weak and not based on anything other than you opinion. You have also identified yourself as the type of person who makes this sport so toxic. In the end, the team that wins will most likely be the team that gets great goalie play, plays great defense (including the Mids), re-defends well and controls the middle of the field (in transition and on the draw).

Could you come up with a few more cliches ,controls the middle of the field is your best one . “...holds their opponent to fewer than they normally score sounds like a solid argument “ until you get a clue and realize that as the teams competition get better of course they would be expected to score less than their season average . As a matter of fact the winning teams have all scored less than their season averages. You lose all credibility because you are clearly uneducated and that’s what makes this sport toxic , clueless parents spewing nonsense because they are bitter that their kid did not make UA, was not recruited by the top teams , was switched to play defense. You don’t think that a teams record can be used to compare or rank teams yet the 8 seeded teams have made it to this weekend ,do you think the seeding committee just guessed .
The best thing about your entire post is saying someone loses all credibility when using ad hominem attacks while you are using ad hominem attacks .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It looks as though in this discussion, statistics are being used in two different ways. One is trying to use cumulative offense & defense ranking for the season, the other is using numbers from the championship game (goals allowed). I do agree with the point that statistics as well as a teams record can not be used to compare or rank teams in this sport.
The argument that the team that plays the best defense in the championship game or holds their opponent to fewer goals than they normally score sounds like a solid argument.

You lose all credibility with your ad hominem attacks, they signal that your argument is weak and not based on anything other than you opinion. You have also identified yourself as the type of person who makes this sport so toxic. In the end, the team that wins will most likely be the team that gets great goalie play, plays great defense (including the Mids), re-defends well and controls the middle of the field (in transition and on the draw).

Could you come up with a few more cliches ,controls the middle of the field is your best one . “...holds their opponent to fewer than they normally score sounds like a solid argument “ until you get a clue and realize that as the teams competition get better of course they would be expected to score less than their season average . As a matter of fact the winning teams have all scored less than their season averages. You lose all credibility because you are clearly uneducated and that’s what makes this sport toxic , clueless parents spewing nonsense because they are bitter that their kid did not make UA, was not recruited by the top teams , was switched to play defense. You don’t think that a teams record can be used to compare or rank teams yet the 8 seeded teams have made it to this weekend ,do you think the seeding committee just guessed .
The best thing about your entire post is saying someone loses all credibility when using ad hominem attacks while you are using ad hominem attacks .

Wow, the hits just keep coming... I think you might want to dust off the old dictionary and review the definition of an ad hominem attack as I didn't notice one in the post above yours. Didn't see any cliches either but that's neither here or there it's just his opinion. How you make the leap from "what it takes to win a championship" to... bitter parents because their kids did not making UA, not being recruited by top teams or their kid was moved to defense... is a bit strange and really makes no sense at all. If the committee used a teams record to seed the teams the seeding would have looked like this:

1 - UNC at 18 - 0
2 - NU at 13 - 0
3 - Stanford at 11 - 0
4 - Denver at 15 - 1
5 - Fairfield at 13 - 1
6 - Jacksonville at 11 - 1
7 - UMass at 15 - 2
8 - Stony Brook at 14 -2

Obviously the seeds were not based on record.

So whose getting the T? North or Scane? Nobody else close!

Why is Women’s US lacrosse not announcing the new college player invites to the tryout in June. This is quite an honor for these girls. Is it a secret between JL and JS?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why is Women’s US lacrosse not announcing the new college player invites to the tryout in June. This is quite an honor for these girls. Is it a secret between JL and JS?

Why do you care? Can't wait to post about little Suzie ball hog on your Instagram?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So whose getting the T? North or Scane? Nobody else close!

Ortega. She will win most likely and UNC will most likely win the championship. Look at the history of this award, that’s how it goes most often.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So whose getting the T? North or Scane? Nobody else close!

I think it will come down to Final Four performance (assuming both of their teams make it).

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why is Women’s US lacrosse not announcing the new college player invites to the tryout in June. This is quite an honor for these girls. Is it a secret between JL and JS?

Just a thought, maybe they are waiting until after the college season is over. I agree, it is a great honor to be invited to the tryouts. Congratulations to all who were invited. 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It looks as though in this discussion, statistics are being used in two different ways. One is trying to use cumulative offense & defense ranking for the season, the other is using numbers from the championship game (goals allowed). I do agree with the point that statistics as well as a teams record can not be used to compare or rank teams in this sport.
The argument that the team that plays the best defense in the championship game or holds their opponent to fewer goals than they normally score sounds like a solid argument.

You lose all credibility with your ad hominem attacks, they signal that your argument is weak and not based on anything other than you opinion. You have also identified yourself as the type of person who makes this sport so toxic. In the end, the team that wins will most likely be the team that gets great goalie play, plays great defense (including the Mids), re-defends well and controls the middle of the field (in transition and on the draw).

Could you come up with a few more cliches ,controls the middle of the field is your best one . “...holds their opponent to fewer than they normally score sounds like a solid argument “ until you get a clue and realize that as the teams competition get better of course they would be expected to score less than their season average . As a matter of fact the winning teams have all scored less than their season averages. You lose all credibility because you are clearly uneducated and that’s what makes this sport toxic , clueless parents spewing nonsense because they are bitter that their kid did not make UA, was not recruited by the top teams , was switched to play defense. You don’t think that a teams record can be used to compare or rank teams yet the 8 seeded teams have made it to this weekend ,do you think the seeding committee just guessed .
The best thing about your entire post is saying someone loses all credibility when using ad hominem attacks while you are using ad hominem attacks .

Wow, the hits just keep coming... I think you might want to dust off the old dictionary and review the definition of an ad hominem attack as I didn't notice one in the post above yours. Didn't see any cliches either but that's neither here or there it's just his opinion. How you make the leap from "what it takes to win a championship" to... bitter parents because their kids did not making UA, not being recruited by top teams or their kid was moved to defense... is a bit strange and really makes no sense at all. If the committee used a teams record to seed the teams the seeding would have looked like this:

1 - UNC at 18 - 0
2 - NU at 13 - 0
3 - Stanford at 11 - 0
4 - Denver at 15 - 1
5 - Fairfield at 13 - 1
6 - Jacksonville at 11 - 1
7 - UMass at 15 - 2
8 - Stony Brook at 14 -2

Obviously the seeds were not based on record.

I get it now, you are either brilliant at playing clueless or just truly clueless. When you attacked me (saying I am toxic..) and not my position that is the very definition of an ad hominem attack. The leap was simple ,this sport is filled with bitter parents like yourself who I would guess can't stand that their defense playing daughter does not get the recognition that the offensive players get so they constantly bring up the old cliche "defense wins championships" .If you do not think a teams record is one of the main factors the seeding committee uses it just shows how completely clueless you are.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It looks as though in this discussion, statistics are being used in two different ways. One is trying to use cumulative offense & defense ranking for the season, the other is using numbers from the championship game (goals allowed). I do agree with the point that statistics as well as a teams record can not be used to compare or rank teams in this sport.
The argument that the team that plays the best defense in the championship game or holds their opponent to fewer goals than they normally score sounds like a solid argument.

You lose all credibility with your ad hominem attacks, they signal that your argument is weak and not based on anything other than you opinion. You have also identified yourself as the type of person who makes this sport so toxic. In the end, the team that wins will most likely be the team that gets great goalie play, plays great defense (including the Mids), re-defends well and controls the middle of the field (in transition and on the draw).

Could you come up with a few more cliches ,controls the middle of the field is your best one . “...holds their opponent to fewer than they normally score sounds like a solid argument “ until you get a clue and realize that as the teams competition get better of course they would be expected to score less than their season average . As a matter of fact the winning teams have all scored less than their season averages. You lose all credibility because you are clearly uneducated and that’s what makes this sport toxic , clueless parents spewing nonsense because they are bitter that their kid did not make UA, was not recruited by the top teams , was switched to play defense. You don’t think that a teams record can be used to compare or rank teams yet the 8 seeded teams have made it to this weekend ,do you think the seeding committee just guessed .
The best thing about your entire post is saying someone loses all credibility when using ad hominem attacks while you are using ad hominem attacks .

Wow, the hits just keep coming... I think you might want to dust off the old dictionary and review the definition of an ad hominem attack as I didn't notice one in the post above yours. Didn't see any cliches either but that's neither here or there it's just his opinion. How you make the leap from "what it takes to win a championship" to... bitter parents because their kids did not making UA, not being recruited by top teams or their kid was moved to defense... is a bit strange and really makes no sense at all. If the committee used a teams record to seed the teams the seeding would have looked like this:

1 - UNC at 18 - 0
2 - NU at 13 - 0
3 - Stanford at 11 - 0
4 - Denver at 15 - 1
5 - Fairfield at 13 - 1
6 - Jacksonville at 11 - 1
7 - UMass at 15 - 2
8 - Stony Brook at 14 -2

Obviously the seeds were not based on record.

I get it now, you are either brilliant at playing clueless or just truly clueless. When you attacked me (saying I am toxic..) and not my position that is the very definition of an ad hominem attack. The leap was simple ,this sport is filled with bitter parents like yourself who I would guess can't stand that their defense playing daughter does not get the recognition that the offensive players get so they constantly bring up the old cliche "defense wins championships" .If you do not think a teams record is one of the main factors the seeding committee uses it just shows how completely clueless you are.

Bla Bla Bla.... give it a rest already. You responses, your attitude, your attacks and your opinions tell us all we need to know about you. You know nothing about the people you are responding to or their daughters yet you believe you do, the same way that you believe you know everything else. The reality is that you do not. It has been entertaining watching you blow up though. I’ll go with the team that plays the best defense in the championship game will win. Just my opinion.

Any chance of an upset or two this weekend?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any chance of an upset or two this weekend?

Duke over NW

Hilarious. Northwestern by at least 8

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Hilarious. Northwestern by at least 8

ND and Florida have a chance.... Maybe. ND probably the best chance. No dog in this fight so just hoping for competitive games. Stony Brook surprised me last week but don’t think they can pull it off.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Hilarious. Northwestern by at least 8

ND and Florida have a chance.... Maybe. ND probably the best chance. No dog in this fight so just hoping for competitive games. Stony Brook surprised me last week but don’t think they can pull it off.

Same here - just looking to watch some competitive games.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why is Women’s US lacrosse not announcing the new college player invites to the tryout in June. This is quite an honor for these girls. Is it a secret between JL and JS?

Just a thought, maybe they are waiting until after the college season is over. I agree, it is a great honor to be invited to the tryouts. Congratulations to all who were invited. 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

Interesting how the number 1 recruit in the 2020 class isn't listed

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why is Women’s US lacrosse not announcing the new college player invites to the tryout in June. This is quite an honor for these girls. Is it a secret between JL and JS?

Just a thought, maybe they are waiting until after the college season is over. I agree, it is a great honor to be invited to the tryouts. Congratulations to all who were invited. 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

Interesting how the number 1 recruit in the 2020 class isn't listed

Why is that interesting?

I agree. Not interesting at all. The attack options are loaded on this USA team. Needs and additions are at the middie area where they need 7-8 players. To say not deep is not right but not nearly as deep as Attack choices on this list.

Had the privilege of being at SB vs NC game. Thought there was an upset in the making but NC stayed poised and controlled the last portion of the game. Congratulations to both teams.

Wow! Very telling games today. Great effort by SB was really rooting for them. I'm thinking it's going to be either NW or BC. Both North and Scane were lights out, the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two phenomenal players. Can't wait for next week's finale

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow! Very telling games today. Great effort by SB was really rooting for them. I'm thinking it's going to be either NW or BC. Both North and Scane were lights out, the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two phenomenal players. Can't wait for next week's finale

Your comments shows your complete lack of knowledge . We get it you dislike Ortega but what would make you think BC makes the finals because they beat ND who 2 weeks ago gave up 18 straight goals against UNC . If North wins the Tewaaraton then the award should stand for something different .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow! Very telling games today. Great effort by SB was really rooting for them. I'm thinking it's going to be either NW or BC. Both North and Scane were lights out, the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two phenomenal players. Can't wait for next week's finale

Your comments shows your complete lack of knowledge . We get it you dislike Ortega but what would make you think BC makes the finals because they beat ND who 2 weeks ago gave up 18 straight goals against UNC . If North wins the Tewaaraton then the award should stand for something different .

Don't dislike Ortega at all. She's a great player and played very well today. The other two are notch up in my opinion, and their teams had dominant wins, where UNC barely survived as a number 1 seed. We'll see what happens next week.

Salisbury vs Tufts in what should be a great final.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow! Very telling games today. Great effort by SB was really rooting for them. I'm thinking it's going to be either NW or BC. Both North and Scane were lights out, the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two phenomenal players. Can't wait for next week's finale

Your comments shows your complete lack of knowledge . We get it you dislike Ortega but what would make you think BC makes the finals because they beat ND who 2 weeks ago gave up 18 straight goals against UNC . If North wins the Tewaaraton then the award should stand for something different .

Don't dislike Ortega at all. She's a great player and played very well today. The other two are notch up in my opinion, and their teams had dominant wins, where UNC barely survived as a number 1 seed. We'll see what happens next week.

Your comment is ridiculous and based on nonsense . You seem to use seeding against UNC yet they would not be a one seed without Ortega . I could be wrong but UNC is undefeated having won both the regular season ACC title and the ACC tournament . I can guarantee you UNC does not faceguard North while BC will Ortega or Hoeg or both . The reason I bring this up is you cannot base your “ knowledge of the game “ on who scores more goals or points as who you play and how they play the game matters . To say the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two is just uneducated .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow! Very telling games today. Great effort by SB was really rooting for them. I'm thinking it's going to be either NW or BC. Both North and Scane were lights out, the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two phenomenal players. Can't wait for next week's finale

Your comments shows your complete lack of knowledge . We get it you dislike Ortega but what would make you think BC makes the finals because they beat ND who 2 weeks ago gave up 18 straight goals against UNC . If North wins the Tewaaraton then the award should stand for something different .

Don't dislike Ortega at all. She's a great player and played very well today. The other two are notch up in my opinion, and their teams had dominant wins, where UNC barely survived as a number 1 seed. We'll see what happens next week.

Your comment is ridiculous and based on nonsense . You seem to use seeding against UNC yet they would not be a one seed without Ortega . I could be wrong but UNC is undefeated having won both the regular season ACC title and the ACC tournament . I can guarantee you UNC does not faceguard North while BC will Ortega or Hoeg or both . The reason I bring this up is you cannot base your “ knowledge of the game “ on who scores more goals or points as who you play and how they play the game matters . To say the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two is just uneducated .

All three are terrific players, All are worthy of the award it will come down to Final Four Performance, IMHO. From what I have seen Scane and North are similar in that they are powerful dynamic players who do a lot of their work dodging / going to goal. Ortega can certainly dodge but is more finesse and is excellent maybe the best off-ball and maybe the best finisher. Each plays a different roll on their respective
Teams. The tactics a team decides to use in Oerter to defend each player does not indicate which player is best. Carolina could probably win without Ortega, not sure if BC or NU can win without CN of IS. Again, they simply play different rolls. I think it goes to the player who the committee believes has the best Final Four appearance and if their team wins the NC it will be a big help.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow! Very telling games today. Great effort by SB was really rooting for them. I'm thinking it's going to be either NW or BC. Both North and Scane were lights out, the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two phenomenal players. Can't wait for next week's finale

Your comments shows your complete lack of knowledge . We get it you dislike Ortega but what would make you think BC makes the finals because they beat ND who 2 weeks ago gave up 18 straight goals against UNC . If North wins the Tewaaraton then the award should stand for something different .

Don't dislike Ortega at all. She's a great player and played very well today. The other two are notch up in my opinion, and their teams had dominant wins, where UNC barely survived as a number 1 seed. We'll see what happens next week.

Your comment is ridiculous and based on nonsense . You seem to use seeding against UNC yet they would not be a one seed without Ortega . I could be wrong but UNC is undefeated having won both the regular season ACC title and the ACC tournament . I can guarantee you UNC does not faceguard North while BC will Ortega or Hoeg or both . The reason I bring this up is you cannot base your “ knowledge of the game “ on who scores more goals or points as who you play and how they play the game matters . To say the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two is just uneducated .

Umm... you’ll see I’m right in a couple weeks!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow! Very telling games today. Great effort by SB was really rooting for them. I'm thinking it's going to be either NW or BC. Both North and Scane were lights out, the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two phenomenal players. Can't wait for next week's finale

Your comments shows your complete lack of knowledge . We get it you dislike Ortega but what would make you think BC makes the finals because they beat ND who 2 weeks ago gave up 18 straight goals against UNC . If North wins the Tewaaraton then the award should stand for something different .

Don't dislike Ortega at all. She's a great player and played very well today. The other two are notch up in my opinion, and their teams had dominant wins, where UNC barely survived as a number 1 seed. We'll see what happens next week.

They are all amazing players and I think Hoeg should also have been a finalist, but North deserves the Tewaaraton in my opinion. She is an extra level of amazing. UNC having closer ncaa games has more to do with the committee messing up 5-8 seeding than UNC being overrated as top seed. It’s the quarterfinals - games should not be so lopsided! ND also lost 4-18 to UNC in the ACC semis and while I think they have great players and did not end up meeting their potential in the end, they did not earn a 5 seed when it counted. Duke should not have been seeded just because they “didn’t get blown out much” against the top ACC teams. UNC, BC, and SU were very deserving of top 4 seeding - no question about it and a top year overall for ACC - but there are a handful of other teams like SBU that once again showed they deserve benefit of the doubt over middle of the pack ACC teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow! Very telling games today. Great effort by SB was really rooting for them. I'm thinking it's going to be either NW or BC. Both North and Scane were lights out, the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two phenomenal players. Can't wait for next week's finale

Your comments shows your complete lack of knowledge . We get it you dislike Ortega but what would make you think BC makes the finals because they beat ND who 2 weeks ago gave up 18 straight goals against UNC . If North wins the Tewaaraton then the award should stand for something different .

Don't dislike Ortega at all. She's a great player and played very well today. The other two are notch up in my opinion, and their teams had dominant wins, where UNC barely survived as a number 1 seed. We'll see what happens next week.

Your comment is ridiculous and based on nonsense . You seem to use seeding against UNC yet they would not be a one seed without Ortega . I could be wrong but UNC is undefeated having won both the regular season ACC title and the ACC tournament . I can guarantee you UNC does not faceguard North while BC will Ortega or Hoeg or both . The reason I bring this up is you cannot base your “ knowledge of the game “ on who scores more goals or points as who you play and how they play the game matters . To say the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two is just uneducated .

Im a huge Ortega fan, but how can you ignore 170 DC. That’s just out of this world!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow! Very telling games today. Great effort by SB was really rooting for them. I'm thinking it's going to be either NW or BC. Both North and Scane were lights out, the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two phenomenal players. Can't wait for next week's finale

Your comments shows your complete lack of knowledge . We get it you dislike Ortega but what would make you think BC makes the finals because they beat ND who 2 weeks ago gave up 18 straight goals against UNC . If North wins the Tewaaraton then the award should stand for something different .

Don't dislike Ortega at all. She's a great player and played very well today. The other two are notch up in my opinion, and their teams had dominant wins, where UNC barely survived as a number 1 seed. We'll see what happens next week.

Your comment is ridiculous and based on nonsense . You seem to use seeding against UNC yet they would not be a one seed without Ortega . I could be wrong but UNC is undefeated having won both the regular season ACC title and the ACC tournament . I can guarantee you UNC does not faceguard North while BC will Ortega or Hoeg or both . The reason I bring this up is you cannot base your “ knowledge of the game “ on who scores more goals or points as who you play and how they play the game matters . To say the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two is just uneducated .

Im a huge Ortega fan, but how can you ignore 170 DC. That’s just out of this world!

I don’t ignore it but she has essentially taken every draw for BC even in all the blowout games so yes it’s an inflated number . It’s also the same way I don’t ignore her 11 assists which is a low number especially considering how much time the ball is in her stick . That said I took issue with the poster that said the Tewaaraton is clearly between Scane and North when it clearly is not . Has Ortega been shut down in any game , has North which again has a lot to do with how teams game plan against them.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow! Very telling games today. Great effort by SB was really rooting for them. I'm thinking it's going to be either NW or BC. Both North and Scane were lights out, the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two phenomenal players. Can't wait for next week's finale

Your comments shows your complete lack of knowledge . We get it you dislike Ortega but what would make you think BC makes the finals because they beat ND who 2 weeks ago gave up 18 straight goals against UNC . If North wins the Tewaaraton then the award should stand for something different .

Don't dislike Ortega at all. She's a great player and played very well today. The other two are notch up in my opinion, and their teams had dominant wins, where UNC barely survived as a number 1 seed. We'll see what happens next week.

Your comment is ridiculous and based on nonsense . You seem to use seeding against UNC yet they would not be a one seed without Ortega . I could be wrong but UNC is undefeated having won both the regular season ACC title and the ACC tournament . I can guarantee you UNC does not faceguard North while BC will Ortega or Hoeg or both . The reason I bring this up is you cannot base your “ knowledge of the game “ on who scores more goals or points as who you play and how they play the game matters . To say the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two is just uneducated .

Im a huge Ortega fan, but how can you ignore 170 DC. That’s just out of this world!

I don’t ignore it but she has essentially taken every draw for BC even in all the blowout games so yes it’s an inflated number . It’s also the same way I don’t ignore her 11 assists which is a low number especially considering how much time the ball is in her stick . That said I took issue with the poster that said the Tewaaraton is clearly between Scane and North when it clearly is not . Has Ortega been shut down in any game , has North which again has a lot to do with how teams game plan against them.

Sounds like a dad trying to justify why his daughter should be the winner. Probably did the same thing in HS. Sorry not even close! North or Scane different level.

Had a chance to watch SU v FL last night. A better/closer game than 17-11 would lead you to think. But I have a question FL was missing possibly the number 1,2,3 ranked defender in the country in CT number 16. Did she get injuried? She is an incredible defender and leader of that D and team.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow! Very telling games today. Great effort by SB was really rooting for them. I'm thinking it's going to be either NW or BC. Both North and Scane were lights out, the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two phenomenal players. Can't wait for next week's finale

Your comments shows your complete lack of knowledge . We get it you dislike Ortega but what would make you think BC makes the finals because they beat ND who 2 weeks ago gave up 18 straight goals against UNC . If North wins the Tewaaraton then the award should stand for something different .

Don't dislike Ortega at all. She's a great player and played very well today. The other two are notch up in my opinion, and their teams had dominant wins, where UNC barely survived as a number 1 seed. We'll see what happens next week.

Your comment is ridiculous and based on nonsense . You seem to use seeding against UNC yet they would not be a one seed without Ortega . I could be wrong but UNC is undefeated having won both the regular season ACC title and the ACC tournament . I can guarantee you UNC does not faceguard North while BC will Ortega or Hoeg or both . The reason I bring this up is you cannot base your “ knowledge of the game “ on who scores more goals or points as who you play and how they play the game matters . To say the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two is just uneducated .

Im a huge Ortega fan, but how can you ignore 170 DC. That’s just out of this world!

I don’t ignore it but she has essentially taken every draw for BC even in all the blowout games so yes it’s an inflated number . It’s also the same way I don’t ignore her 11 assists which is a low number especially considering how much time the ball is in her stick . That said I took issue with the poster that said the Tewaaraton is clearly between Scane and North when it clearly is not . Has Ortega been shut down in any game , has North which again has a lot to do with how teams game plan against them.

So, I guess by your logic we should discount the Carolina players numbers considering the fact that approximately 70% of her goals and points came in "blowout games" where UNC won by 10 or more goals... I guess the numbers (goals and assists) are also inflated.

Your comments shows your complete lack of knowledge . We get it you dislike Ortega but what would make you think BC makes the finals because they beat ND who 2 weeks ago gave up 18 straight goals against UNC . If North wins the Tewaaraton then the award should stand for something different .[/quote]

Don't dislike Ortega at all. She's a great player and played very well today. The other two are notch up in my opinion, and their teams had dominant wins, where UNC barely survived as a number 1 seed. We'll see what happens next week.[/quote]

Your comment is ridiculous and based on nonsense . You seem to use seeding against UNC yet they would not be a one seed without Ortega . I could be wrong but UNC is undefeated having won both the regular season ACC title and the ACC tournament . I can guarantee you UNC does not faceguard North while BC will Ortega or Hoeg or both . The reason I bring this up is you cannot base your “ knowledge of the game “ on who scores more goals or points as who you play and how they play the game matters . To say the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two is just uneducated .[/quote]

Im a huge Ortega fan, but how can you ignore 170 DC. That’s just out of this world![/quote]

I don’t ignore it but she has essentially taken every draw for BC even in all the blowout games so yes it’s an inflated number . It’s also the same way I don’t ignore her 11 assists which is a low number especially considering how much time the ball is in her stick . That said I took issue with the poster that said the Tewaaraton is clearly between Scane and North when it clearly is not . Has Ortega been shut down in any game , has North which again has a lot to do with how teams game plan against them.[/quote]

So, I guess by your logic we should discount the Carolina players numbers considering the fact that approximately 70% of her goals and points came in "blowout games" where UNC won by 10 or more goals... I guess the numbers (goals and assists) are also inflated.[/quote]

See you finally got it ,you are not as slow as I thought. You cannot just look at the numbers and determine which player deserves the Tewaaraton .You need to actually watch them play ,especially in the more evenly matched games. In my opinion any one of the players that have been mentioned are worthy and actually some that are not on the list . There are things such as leadership or do they make the players around them better that are admittedly subjective that should count for something and it takes watching these players not just their stats.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

ACC 3 team conference this year. ND just can’t get it together again. Why were they overhyped again this year? Surprised by Virginia this year, although it’s been a while since they were a final four caliber team they are usually more competitive. Duke just can’t seem to get back to where they were “consistently Top 10” it’s been more than a few years now. Va Tech and Louisville are what they are... very solid programs in a very tough conference... IDK what they should do, play some tough Out of conference games or follow ND and Duke and not challenge themselves out of conference.

Your post is truly uninformed . If the ACC is a 3 team conference then the big 10 is a 1 team conference and all other conferences are a zero team conference . Please tell us the teams that would do better than Duke , ND , UVA if they were in the ACC . Both Duke and ND gave UNC all they could handle and if you watched UVA vs Cuse or vs BC on Wednesday you would definitely say competitive . As far as Va Tech they have been hurt by COVID and injury this year but seem to have gotten it together at the end of the year . The final four could easily be an all ACC battle if the NCAA were to separate the teams but they will not as they want parity . If Louisville or Va tech were to make the tournament there are many teams from other conferences they would beat . The ACC is stacked this year and playing some of these teams 2x then again in the tournament is brutal .

Bla bla bla.... same song all the time.... if the queen had you know what she would be king.... this year the same as every year several teams are stronger than several ACC teams. When was the last time we saw an all ACC final four? Give it a rest already.

And yet you will not name any team because you are sadly uninformed . I will make it easy for you , what team other than NW would be competitive in the ACC . The reason you will not see an all ACC final four is because the NCAA committee will
have them play each other . You can be the dope who has no clue or give us some other teams , how did SBU do against ACC and they are the next best after NW other than ACC teams

WOW ,you anti ACC must feel really clueless to have argued with the above posts for the better part of a couple weeks. Honestly these posts could not have been proven any better this year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a chance to watch SU v FL last night. A better/closer game than 17-11 would lead you to think. But I have a question FL was missing possibly the number 1,2,3 ranked defender in the country in CT number 16. Did she get injuried? She is an incredible defender and leader of that D and team.

I believe she is injured. Yes, difficult to lose a key player and leader like that. Cuse lost their two best attackers due to injury and has been playing without them. Unfortunately seems like many teams have to deal with this.

Congratulations to Salisbury, winning the D3 title 14-13 over Tufts. Tufts came from down 14-10, hitting a post late in the game that would have tied it. Great game.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

ACC 3 team conference this year. ND just can’t get it together again. Why were they overhyped again this year? Surprised by Virginia this year, although it’s been a while since they were a final four caliber team they are usually more competitive. Duke just can’t seem to get back to where they were “consistently Top 10” it’s been more than a few years now. Va Tech and Louisville are what they are... very solid programs in a very tough conference... IDK what they should do, play some tough Out of conference games or follow ND and Duke and not challenge themselves out of conference.

Your post is truly uninformed . If the ACC is a 3 team conference then the big 10 is a 1 team conference and all other conferences are a zero team conference . Please tell us the teams that would do better than Duke , ND , UVA if they were in the ACC . Both Duke and ND gave UNC all they could handle and if you watched UVA vs Cuse or vs BC on Wednesday you would definitely say competitive . As far as Va Tech they have been hurt by COVID and injury this year but seem to have gotten it together at the end of the year . The final four could easily be an all ACC battle if the NCAA were to separate the teams but they will not as they want parity . If Louisville or Va tech were to make the tournament there are many teams from other conferences they would beat . The ACC is stacked this year and playing some of these teams 2x then again in the tournament is brutal .

Bla bla bla.... same song all the time.... if the queen had you know what she would be king.... this year the same as every year several teams are stronger than several ACC teams. When was the last time we saw an all ACC final four? Give it a rest already.

And yet you will not name any team because you are sadly uninformed . I will make it easy for you , what team other than NW would be competitive in the ACC . The reason you will not see an all ACC final four is because the NCAA committee will
have them play each other . You can be the dope who has no clue or give us some other teams , how did SBU do against ACC and they are the next best after NW other than ACC teams

WOW ,you anti ACC must feel really clueless to have argued with the above posts for the better part of a couple weeks. Honestly these posts could not have been proven any better this year.

Considering Maryland vs Duke was a one goal game I would say obviously Maryland would have been competitive. Florida played Syracuse tough so I would say they would be competitive, Stony Brook gave UnC a better game than most of the ACC schools did. I would say this is a year like most other years. Several teams can compete with all but the Top 2 maybe 3 Teams in the ACC. It is what it is, just like the BIG, Ivy, Patriot etc... The Top 2-3 Teams are significantly stronger than the rest. ND ain’t UNC.

Just wondering if Spallina can win the big one at Stony Brook. The school draws a lot of Long Island talent but not a lot from out of state.

So we heard a lot around the draw at ND v BC game so had to watch it myself. Whoever says North never goes up on the draw is exactly right. The rule states that you don’t have to go straight up but your first motion has to be up. Her first motion 90 percent of the time is down, then up to the side in a swooping motion. Immediate illegal draw. I don’t how the refs can’t see that motion down. It is pretty obvious. But like speeding, your not guilty until caught doing it. A definite advantage on the draw if the ref doesn’t call it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So we heard a lot around the draw at ND v BC game so had to watch it myself. Whoever says North never goes up on the draw is exactly right. The rule states that you don’t have to go straight up but your first motion has to be up. Her first motion 90 percent of the time is down, then up to the side in a swooping motion. Immediate illegal draw. I don’t how the refs can’t see that motion down. It is pretty obvious. But like speeding, your not guilty until caught doing it. A definite advantage on the draw if the ref doesn’t call it.

Lol, sounds like a whiny lost. Good thing you’re not the ref!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just wondering if Spallina can win the big one at Stony Brook. The school draws a lot of Long Island talent but not a lot from out of state.

Although anything is possible it is highly unlikely. Only 12 Programs have ever won a championship with a handful winning more than 1. It has been a while since Penn State, Virginia, Princeton and Northwestern have won The National Championship. How long did it take for UNC to win their first championship? Notre Dame and Duke have not been able to do it, Stanford and USC have a lot to offer recruits yet they have not been able to get over the hump. Syracuse? No. AW has done an incredible job at BC but no NC. Florida? Michigan? No. At the end of the day coaches need “The Players “. JS has been a few players short multiple times, as have many programs. The best coaches can’t win if they don’t have the athletes and bad coaches can’t win even when they have the best athletes.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So we heard a lot around the draw at ND v BC game so had to watch it myself. Whoever says North never goes up on the draw is exactly right. The rule states that you don’t have to go straight up but your first motion has to be up. Her first motion 90 percent of the time is down, then up to the side in a swooping motion. Immediate illegal draw. I don’t how the refs can’t see that motion down. It is pretty obvious. But like speeding, your not guilty until caught doing it. A definite advantage on the draw if the ref doesn’t call it.

Who is we? I don’t recall hearing a single thing about it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So we heard a lot around the draw at ND v BC game so had to watch it myself. Whoever says North never goes up on the draw is exactly right. The rule states that you don’t have to go straight up but your first motion has to be up. Her first motion 90 percent of the time is down, then up to the side in a swooping motion. Immediate illegal draw. I don’t how the refs can’t see that motion down. It is pretty obvious. But like speeding, your not guilty until caught doing it. A definite advantage on the draw if the ref doesn’t call it.

Who is we? I don’t recall hearing a single thing about it.

I don't know who we are but I do know that Gait and Syracuse were definitely on the refs about it at the ACC tournament .I did go and watch and it does look like she either drops the stick down first or sometimes just straight forward. Not sure if during the Cuse game any illegal draws were called but definitely not a legal draw if going by the rules not sure why the refs do not call it .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So we heard a lot around the draw at ND v BC game so had to watch it myself. Whoever says North never goes up on the draw is exactly right. The rule states that you don’t have to go straight up but your first motion has to be up. Her first motion 90 percent of the time is down, then up to the side in a swooping motion. Immediate illegal draw. I don’t how the refs can’t see that motion down. It is pretty obvious. But like speeding, your not guilty until caught doing it. A definite advantage on the draw if the ref doesn’t call it.

Who is we? I don’t recall hearing a single thing about it.

I don't know who we are but I do know that Gait and Syracuse were definitely on the refs about it at the ACC tournament .I did go and watch and it does look like she either drops the stick down first or sometimes just straight forward. Not sure if during the Cuse game any illegal draws were called but definitely not a legal draw if going by the rules not sure why the refs do not call it .

I do recall her getting called on it a lot in a previous game, but not sure which one - maybe UNC? Whichever game it was, you could tell how mad she was getting.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So we heard a lot around the draw at ND v BC game so had to watch it myself. Whoever says North never goes up on the draw is exactly right. The rule states that you don’t have to go straight up but your first motion has to be up. Her first motion 90 percent of the time is down, then up to the side in a swooping motion. Immediate illegal draw. I don’t how the refs can’t see that motion down. It is pretty obvious. But like speeding, your not guilty until caught doing it. A definite advantage on the draw if the ref doesn’t call it.

Who is we? I don’t recall hearing a single thing about it.

I don't know who we are but I do know that Gait and Syracuse were definitely on the refs about it at the ACC tournament .I did go and watch and it does look like she either drops the stick down first or sometimes just straight forward. Not sure if during the Cuse game any illegal draws were called but definitely not a legal draw if going by the rules not sure why the refs do not call it .

I do recall her getting called on it a lot in a previous game, but not sure which one - maybe UNC? Whichever game it was, you could tell how mad she was getting.

People are funny. I have seen posts on here about how her celebrations should keep her out of the running, how she is not a good teammate, how her DC numbers are inflated because she takes the draw even in blowout games, she cheats and GG and the SU coaches even complained to the officials and now the topper “how mad” she was getting.... this has actually become comical.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

ACC 3 team conference this year. ND just can’t get it together again. Why were they overhyped again this year? Surprised by Virginia this year, although it’s been a while since they were a final four caliber team they are usually more competitive. Duke just can’t seem to get back to where they were “consistently Top 10” it’s been more than a few years now. Va Tech and Louisville are what they are... very solid programs in a very tough conference... IDK what they should do, play some tough Out of conference games or follow ND and Duke and not challenge themselves out of conference.

Your post is truly uninformed . If the ACC is a 3 team conference then the big 10 is a 1 team conference and all other conferences are a zero team conference . Please tell us the teams that would do better than Duke , ND , UVA if they were in the ACC . Both Duke and ND gave UNC all they could handle and if you watched UVA vs Cuse or vs BC on Wednesday you would definitely say competitive . As far as Va Tech they have been hurt by COVID and injury this year but seem to have gotten it together at the end of the year . The final four could easily be an all ACC battle if the NCAA were to separate the teams but they will not as they want parity . If Louisville or Va tech were to make the tournament there are many teams from other conferences they would beat . The ACC is stacked this year and playing some of these teams 2x then again in the tournament is brutal .

Bla bla bla.... same song all the time.... if the queen had you know what she would be king.... this year the same as every year several teams are stronger than several ACC teams. When was the last time we saw an all ACC final four? Give it a rest already.

And yet you will not name any team because you are sadly uninformed . I will make it easy for you , what team other than NW would be competitive in the ACC . The reason you will not see an all ACC final four is because the NCAA committee will
have them play each other . You can be the dope who has no clue or give us some other teams , how did SBU do against ACC and they are the next best after NW other than ACC teams

WOW ,you anti ACC must feel really clueless to have argued with the above posts for the better part of a couple weeks. Honestly these posts could not have been proven any better this year.

Where did you see any "Anti ACC"? The post I have seen are not anti ACC, the post that I have seen simply point out that all ACC Teams are not the same and they are not all dominant. The post I have seen rebut the opinion that no other teams can compete with the ACC teams.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

ACC 3 team conference this year. ND just can’t get it together again. Why were they overhyped again this year? Surprised by Virginia this year, although it’s been a while since they were a final four caliber team they are usually more competitive. Duke just can’t seem to get back to where they were “consistently Top 10” it’s been more than a few years now. Va Tech and Louisville are what they are... very solid programs in a very tough conference... IDK what they should do, play some tough Out of conference games or follow ND and Duke and not challenge themselves out of conference.

Your post is truly uninformed . If the ACC is a 3 team conference then the big 10 is a 1 team conference and all other conferences are a zero team conference . Please tell us the teams that would do better than Duke , ND , UVA if they were in the ACC . Both Duke and ND gave UNC all they could handle and if you watched UVA vs Cuse or vs BC on Wednesday you would definitely say competitive . As far as Va Tech they have been hurt by COVID and injury this year but seem to have gotten it together at the end of the year . The final four could easily be an all ACC battle if the NCAA were to separate the teams but they will not as they want parity . If Louisville or Va tech were to make the tournament there are many teams from other conferences they would beat . The ACC is stacked this year and playing some of these teams 2x then again in the tournament is brutal .

Bla bla bla.... same song all the time.... if the queen had you know what she would be king.... this year the same as every year several teams are stronger than several ACC teams. When was the last time we saw an all ACC final four? Give it a rest already.

And yet you will not name any team because you are sadly uninformed . I will make it easy for you , what team other than NW would be competitive in the ACC . The reason you will not see an all ACC final four is because the NCAA committee will
have them play each other . You can be the dope who has no clue or give us some other teams , how did SBU do against ACC and they are the next best after NW other than ACC teams

WOW ,you anti ACC must feel really clueless to have argued with the above posts for the better part of a couple weeks. Honestly these posts could not have been proven any better this year.

Where did you see any "Anti ACC"? The post I have seen are not anti ACC, the post that I have seen simply point out that all ACC Teams are not the same and they are not all dominant. The post I have seen rebut the opinion that no other teams can compete with the ACC teams.

To say that the ACC is a 3 team conference is disparaging to some very good teams and it was simply pointed out that if you are going to say that than you might as well say the NCAA D1 is a four team conference. No one said all the teams in the ACC are equal to one another but to discount the other teams as irrelevant is ridiculous and the question was asked what teams from outside the ACC other than NW would be more competitive . I am no ND fan but the haters on here take a swipe at them every chance they get when realistically not many other teams have done better.

To say that the ACC is a 3 team conference is disparaging to some very good teams and it was simply pointed out that if you are going to say that than you might as well say the NCAA D1 is a four team conference. No one said all the teams in the ACC are equal to one another but to discount the other teams as irrelevant is ridiculous and the question was asked what teams from outside the ACC other than NW would be more competitive . I am no ND fan but the haters on here take a swipe at them every chance they get when realistically not many other teams have done better.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From what I have read on here, there is one guy who has the opinion that no team with the exception of NU can compete with the other ACC teams. Others on here have the opinion (myself included) that there are several teams "this" and every year that can in fact compete with the majority of ACC teams. This year, The Big Ten and Ivy league did not compete as usual and many other traditional crossover games did not take place, this year was an aberration to say the least. There were posters on here all year long claiming "Maryland stinks" yet they played Duke to 1 goal (obviously they competed). Stony Brook was obviously competitive with the best team in the ACC so I would assume that they are competitive with the other ACC Teams. Florida was Competitive with Syracuse who is the #2 ACC team so I would say that Florida would be as competitive as the majority of ACC Teams. Since we will never know because the games never happened this year I think that it is reasonable to look at history in order to speculate on what things would have been like if this was a normal year.

The reality is that in recent years, The ACC has been a league dominated by 2 Teams, North Carolina and Boston College. I could care less about ND but the facts speaks for themselves, they have been very average in the ACC and they play a very soft non-conference schedule compared to many perennial Top 20 teams. Duke has even softened their non-conference schedule in recent years (although not to the extent ND has). Virginia and Syracuse play difficult non-conference schedules as do BC & UNC. Va Tech & Louisville are borderline Top 25 Programs so I believe their non-conference schedule are appropriate for them.

The one "poster" seems to be obsessed with "more competitive" as opposed to "as competitive" the problem with that is, we will never know because the games did not happen and never will never happen "this year" so we are left with nothing but opinion.

I have not seen a single post indicating that the ACC is not a strong conference or the deepest conference. However, the opinion that no other teams can compete with The ACC is just that, an opinion and we all know what they say about opinions.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

To say that the ACC is a 3 team conference is disparaging to some very good teams and it was simply pointed out that if you are going to say that than you might as well say the NCAA D1 is a four team conference. No one said all the teams in the ACC are equal to one another but to discount the other teams as irrelevant is ridiculous and the question was asked what teams from outside the ACC other than NW would be more competitive . I am no ND fan but the haters on here take a swipe at them every chance they get when realistically not many other teams have done better.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From what I have read on here, there is one guy who has the opinion that no team with the exception of NU can compete with the other ACC teams. Others on here have the opinion (myself included) that there are several teams "this" and every year that can in fact compete with the majority of ACC teams. This year, The Big Ten and Ivy league did not compete as usual and many other traditional crossover games did not take place, this year was an aberration to say the least. There were posters on here all year long claiming "Maryland stinks" yet they played Duke to 1 goal (obviously they competed). Stony Brook was obviously competitive with the best team in the ACC so I would assume that they are competitive with the other ACC Teams. Florida was Competitive with Syracuse who is the #2 ACC team so I would say that Florida would be as competitive as the majority of ACC Teams. Since we will never know because the games never happened this year I think that it is reasonable to look at history in order to speculate on what things would have been like if this was a normal year.

The reality is that in recent years, The ACC has been a league dominated by 2 Teams, North Carolina and Boston College. I could care less about ND but the facts speaks for themselves, they have been very average in the ACC and they play a very soft non-conference schedule compared to many perennial Top 20 teams. Duke has even softened their non-conference schedule in recent years (although not to the extent ND has). Virginia and Syracuse play difficult non-conference schedules as do BC & UNC. Va Tech & Louisville are borderline Top 25 Programs so I believe their non-conference schedule are appropriate for them.

The one "poster" seems to be obsessed with "more competitive" as opposed to "as competitive" the problem with that is, we will never know because the games did not happen and never will never happen "this year" so we are left with nothing but opinion.

I have not seen a single post indicating that the ACC is not a strong conference or the deepest conference. However, the opinion that no other teams can compete with The ACC is just that, an opinion and we all know what they say about opinions.

Your whole post is non sense . The “ACC “ guy and long winded .He clearly is speaking about this year not past years and clearly was standing up for the ND , UVA , Duke , level teams in the ACC saying other than NW who would be more competitive in the ACC this year . It’s simple but you know it all types keep making up non existent comments .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So we heard a lot around the draw at ND v BC game so had to watch it myself. Whoever says North never goes up on the draw is exactly right. The rule states that you don’t have to go straight up but your first motion has to be up. Her first motion 90 percent of the time is down, then up to the side in a swooping motion. Immediate illegal draw. I don’t how the refs can’t see that motion down. It is pretty obvious. But like speeding, your not guilty until caught doing it. A definite advantage on the draw if the ref doesn’t call it.

Who is we? I don’t recall hearing a single thing about it.

I don't know who we are but I do know that Gait and Syracuse were definitely on the refs about it at the ACC tournament .I did go and watch and it does look like she either drops the stick down first or sometimes just straight forward. Not sure if during the Cuse game any illegal draws were called but definitely not a legal draw if going by the rules not sure why the refs do not call it .

I do recall her getting called on it a lot in a previous game, but not sure which one - maybe UNC? Whichever game it was, you could tell how mad she was getting.

People are funny. I have seen posts on here about how her celebrations should keep her out of the running, how she is not a good teammate, how her DC numbers are inflated because she takes the draw even in blowout games, she cheats and GG and the SU coaches even complained to the officials and now the topper “how mad” she was getting.... this has actually become comical.

How is it comical . She is probably the most disliked player in the game and it’s not because she is so talented . Say what you want but I have spoken to several of her former and current teammates and she is not well liked even by them . As far as the draw it looks like she just dominated ND without doing the dip or force forward in other words legally , against Cuse and previous games was definitely going against the rules .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So we heard a lot around the draw at ND v BC game so had to watch it myself. Whoever says North never goes up on the draw is exactly right. The rule states that you don’t have to go straight up but your first motion has to be up. Her first motion 90 percent of the time is down, then up to the side in a swooping motion. Immediate illegal draw. I don’t how the refs can’t see that motion down. It is pretty obvious. But like speeding, your not guilty until caught doing it. A definite advantage on the draw if the ref doesn’t call it.

Who is we? I don’t recall hearing a single thing about it.

I don't know who we are but I do know that Gait and Syracuse were definitely on the refs about it at the ACC tournament .I did go and watch and it does look like she either drops the stick down first or sometimes just straight forward. Not sure if during the Cuse game any illegal draws were called but definitely not a legal draw if going by the rules not sure why the refs do not call it .

I do recall her getting called on it a lot in a previous game, but not sure which one - maybe UNC? Whichever game it was, you could tell how mad she was getting.

People are funny. I have seen posts on here about how her celebrations should keep her out of the running, how she is not a good teammate, how her DC numbers are inflated because she takes the draw even in blowout games, she cheats and GG and the SU coaches even complained to the officials and now the topper “how mad” she was getting.... this has actually become comical.

How is it comical . She is probably the most disliked player in the game and it’s not because she is so talented . Say what you want but I have spoken to several of her former and current teammates and she is not well liked even by them . As far as the draw it looks like she just dominated ND without doing the dip or force forward in other words legally , against Cuse and previous games was definitely going against the rules .

Lol, you sound like a typical lax dad. All girls are disliked and ball hogs when they are doing better than your daughter. And now you make up lies about cheating? Give it a rest. It's over.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So we heard a lot around the draw at ND v BC game so had to watch it myself. Whoever says North never goes up on the draw is exactly right. The rule states that you don’t have to go straight up but your first motion has to be up. Her first motion 90 percent of the time is down, then up to the side in a swooping motion. Immediate illegal draw. I don’t how the refs can’t see that motion down. It is pretty obvious. But like speeding, your not guilty until caught doing it. A definite advantage on the draw if the ref doesn’t call it.

Who is we? I don’t recall hearing a single thing about it.

I don't know who we are but I do know that Gait and Syracuse were definitely on the refs about it at the ACC tournament .I did go and watch and it does look like she either drops the stick down first or sometimes just straight forward. Not sure if during the Cuse game any illegal draws were called but definitely not a legal draw if going by the rules not sure why the refs do not call it .

I do recall her getting called on it a lot in a previous game, but not sure which one - maybe UNC? Whichever game it was, you could tell how mad she was getting.

People are funny. I have seen posts on here about how her celebrations should keep her out of the running, how she is not a good teammate, how her DC numbers are inflated because she takes the draw even in blowout games, she cheats and GG and the SU coaches even complained to the officials and now the topper “how mad” she was getting.... this has actually become comical.

How is it comical . She is probably the most disliked player in the game and it’s not because she is so talented . Say what you want but I have spoken to several of her former and current teammates and she is not well liked even by them . As far as the draw it looks like she just dominated ND without doing the dip or force forward in other words legally , against Cuse and previous games was definitely going against the rules .

Thanks Jimmy Olsen. You are doing a great job with the daily planet. I’m sure you have done in depth interviews with current and former teammates. I do know this. She is better than your daughter.

I have question I am hoping a ref or someone can answer. I am teaching my youth team the SU flip offense(or trying to) and I saw ion USlacrosse mag Instagram the SU v FL highlight. I saw where the flip person flipped the ball to the her teammate then backed into the defender to block her from staying on the girl she flipped to. Is this legal? I would love to add that in, but thought it would be called for interference or blind pick. Any insight is greatly appreciated.

It’s an illegal pick. Will it be called? Maybe.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

To say that the ACC is a 3 team conference is disparaging to some very good teams and it was simply pointed out that if you are going to say that than you might as well say the NCAA D1 is a four team conference. No one said all the teams in the ACC are equal to one another but to discount the other teams as irrelevant is ridiculous and the question was asked what teams from outside the ACC other than NW would be more competitive . I am no ND fan but the haters on here take a swipe at them every chance they get when realistically not many other teams have done better.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From what I have read on here, there is one guy who has the opinion that no team with the exception of NU can compete with the other ACC teams. Others on here have the opinion (myself included) that there are several teams "this" and every year that can in fact compete with the majority of ACC teams. This year, The Big Ten and Ivy league did not compete as usual and many other traditional crossover games did not take place, this year was an aberration to say the least. There were posters on here all year long claiming "Maryland stinks" yet they played Duke to 1 goal (obviously they competed). Stony Brook was obviously competitive with the best team in the ACC so I would assume that they are competitive with the other ACC Teams. Florida was Competitive with Syracuse who is the #2 ACC team so I would say that Florida would be as competitive as the majority of ACC Teams. Since we will never know because the games never happened this year I think that it is reasonable to look at history in order to speculate on what things would have been like if this was a normal year.

The reality is that in recent years, The ACC has been a league dominated by 2 Teams, North Carolina and Boston College. I could care less about ND but the facts speaks for themselves, they have been very average in the ACC and they play a very soft non-conference schedule compared to many perennial Top 20 teams. Duke has even softened their non-conference schedule in recent years (although not to the extent ND has). Virginia and Syracuse play difficult non-conference schedules as do BC & UNC. Va Tech & Louisville are borderline Top 25 Programs so I believe their non-conference schedule are appropriate for them.

The one "poster" seems to be obsessed with "more competitive" as opposed to "as competitive" the problem with that is, we will never know because the games did not happen and never will never happen "this year" so we are left with nothing but opinion.

I have not seen a single post indicating that the ACC is not a strong conference or the deepest conference. However, the opinion that no other teams can compete with The ACC is just that, an opinion and we all know what they say about opinions.

Your whole post is non sense . The “ACC “ guy and long winded .He clearly is speaking about this year not past years and clearly was standing up for the ND , UVA , Duke , level teams in the ACC saying other than NW who would be more competitive in the ACC this year . It’s simple but you know it all types keep making up non existent comments .

Gibberish.

Excited to watch 2 good games tomorrow - just wish the times were more feasible. Either way, they should be fun to watch!

For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

Originally Posted by Anonymous

For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is.

But so many people here say it's all political and most the girls aren't deserving of playing in the game

Originally Posted by Anonymous

For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is.

There are 95 players playing this weekend who weren’t on UA. 2 ways to look at it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is.

There are 95 players playing this weekend who weren’t on UA. 2 ways to look at it.

Obviously not every player on a team is going to be an Under Armour All-American. 44 players are selected each year, over the past 5 years that's a total of 220 players (not all are still playing, not all eligible 5th years came back, some injuries etc...), There are more than 100 DI women's lacrosse teams and more than 3,000 women competing.

Here is another way to look at it...

Over the past 5 years 24 DI women's programs have brought in at least 1 Under Armour All-American

North Carolina - 23
Maryland - 20
Syracuse - 18
Florida - 14
Notre Dame - 14
Northwestern - 12
Virginia - 12
Boston College - 11
Duke - 10
Stanford - 10
Loyola - 9
Princeton - 7
Penn State - 7
Penn - 5
USC - 5
Hopkins - 4
Stony Brook - 3
Towson - 3
Harvard - 3
Ohio State - 3
Richmond - 2
Va Tech - 2
Yale - 2
Colorado - 1
Oregon - 1
Michigan - 1

(Ivy's have no 5th year or Graduate students)

If you look at recent history 2016 - 2019 even (20' and 21' although they are not normal years) the following teams are always Top 20 at the end of the season:

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Virginia
Princeton
Penn
Stony Brook
Florida

Notre Dame, JMU, Penn State might miss a year but are there just about every year,

Duke had a few off years but was still "others receiving votes or Top 25, Loyola probably similar.

At the end of the day, it is very simple, The Best College Programs consistently bring in The Best HS Players (many of which happen to be Under Armour All-Americans).

Haters like to try and elevate their daughter by trying to tear down or diminish the accomplishments of others.

I have even read on this site how the coaches at the Top College Programs get it wrong "all the time" If they keep getting it wrong, why do they keep winning?

There are plenty of very good players who are not selected to the Under Armour Team but the vast majority of those players still end up at the Top College Programs.

The fact that the coaches at the top college programs and the people who select the UA Team appear to agree on who the best players are says a lot.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is.

There are 95 players playing this weekend who weren’t on UA. 2 ways to look at it.

Obviously not every player on a team is going to be an Under Armour All-American. 44 players are selected each year, over the past 5 years that's a total of 220 players (not all are still playing, not all eligible 5th years came back, some injuries etc...), There are more than 100 DI women's lacrosse teams and more than 3,000 women competing.

Here is another way to look at it...

Over the past 5 years 24 DI women's programs have brought in at least 1 Under Armour All-American

North Carolina - 23
Maryland - 20
Syracuse - 18
Florida - 14
Notre Dame - 14
Northwestern - 12
Virginia - 12
Boston College - 11
Duke - 10
Stanford - 10
Loyola - 9
Princeton - 7
Penn State - 7
Penn - 5
USC - 5
Hopkins - 4
Stony Brook - 3
Towson - 3
Harvard - 3
Ohio State - 3
Richmond - 2
Va Tech - 2
Yale - 2
Colorado - 1
Oregon - 1
Michigan - 1

(Ivy's have no 5th year or Graduate students)

If you look at recent history 2016 - 2019 even (20' and 21' although they are not normal years) the following teams are always Top 20 at the end of the season:

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Virginia
Princeton
Penn
Stony Brook
Florida

Notre Dame, JMU, Penn State might miss a year but are there just about every year,

Duke had a few off years but was still "others receiving votes or Top 25, Loyola probably similar.

At the end of the day, it is very simple, The Best College Programs consistently bring in The Best HS Players (many of which happen to be Under Armour All-Americans).

Haters like to try and elevate their daughter by trying to tear down or diminish the accomplishments of others.

I have even read on this site how the coaches at the Top College Programs get it wrong "all the time" If they keep getting it wrong, why do they keep winning?

There are plenty of very good players who are not selected to the Under Armour Team but the vast majority of those players still end up at the Top College Programs.

The fact that the coaches at the top college programs and the people who select the UA Team appear to agree on who the best players are says a lot.

This year, 7 of the Final 8 teams in the Tournament were in the Top 9 teams as far as UA AA’s ... UNC, Syracuse, Florida, Notre Dame, Northwestern, Boston College and Duke... The only teams not in the Top 10 for UA’s on the roster was Stony Brook. All 4 Final Four teams in the Top 8 with UA’s... Very good chance that the team with the most UA AA’s will win the Championship.
Pretty sure 10 of the 12 starters for unc were UA AA and 13 of the 17 who play in the competitive games were UA.
Obviously there is some correlation.
The Bottom line is really about recruiting, the best programs identify and recruit / bring in the top HS players year after year whether they are UA or not the majority of the best players seem to always go to the same 10 - 20 programs.

Weather should hold out in Towson.

So much for my weather predictions. Should pass over quickly.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

Always going to be haters...

Wow! ACC not as advertised! Watching final seconds. That yellow seals the deal. See ya UNC, been fun!

Not sure if BC will win the championship but it was clearly their D / Goalie play that won the UNC game.

Belle Smith is such an impressive player. Also love Emma Ward. Those two head and shoulders above any other freshman! Big things ahead for those two

UNC just didnt have it today
BC ran out in formation in second half and UNC just trickled back from the locker room

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Belle Smith is such an impressive player. Also love Emma Ward. Those two head and shoulders above any other freshman! Big things ahead for those two

100% agree

It’s going to be great final Sunday. We’ll have a first time champion. Congratulations Boston College and Syracuse.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Not sure if BC will win the championship but it was clearly their D / Goalie play that won the UNC game.

Cuse Goalie and D getting it done was well!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Belle Smith is such an impressive player. Also love Emma Ward. Those two head and shoulders above any other freshman! Big things ahead for those two

Disagree completely, very good players but head and shoulders above all other freshman is a bit much.

Fairly obvious attempt to knock a player you do not like.

Originally Posted by baldbear

It’s going to be great final Sunday. We’ll have a first time champion. Congratulations Boston College and Syracuse.

Should be a great game! So happy a “super team” will not be winning the championship. Looks like the T will go to North regardless. Pretty amazing that BC will have two.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

It’s going to be great final Sunday. We’ll have a first time champion. Congratulations Boston College and Syracuse.

Should be a great game! So happy a “super team” will not be winning the championship. Looks like the T will go to North regardless. Pretty amazing that BC will have two.

What is a super team?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

It’s going to be great final Sunday. We’ll have a first time champion. Congratulations Boston College and Syracuse.

Should be a great game! So happy a “super team” will not be winning the championship. Looks like the T will go to North regardless. Pretty amazing that BC will have two.

What is a super team?

UNC with all their super seniors and secret weapon grad transfers

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

It’s going to be great final Sunday. We’ll have a first time champion. Congratulations Boston College and Syracuse.

Should be a great game! So happy a “super team” will not be winning the championship. Looks like the T will go to North regardless. Pretty amazing that BC will have two.

What is a super team?

UNC with all their super seniors and secret weapon grad transfers

How many super seniors and grad transfers did Syracuse have on the field today?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

It’s going to be great final Sunday. We’ll have a first time champion. Congratulations Boston College and Syracuse.

Should be a great game! So happy a “super team” will not be winning the championship. Looks like the T will go to North regardless. Pretty amazing that BC will have two.

What is a super team?

UNC with all their super seniors and secret weapon grad transfers

Why do you even post your nonsense?

Syracuse had 6 grad students on the field today, 1 of the 6 was a grad transfer (they would have had 8 if not for injuries). UNC played 4 grad students 1 of the 4 was a grad transfer.

So I guess Syracuse would be considered the super team (although I don’t know about NU).

It is really funny how ignorant people pop off on here.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

It’s going to be great final Sunday. We’ll have a first time champion. Congratulations Boston College and Syracuse.

Should be a great game! So happy a “super team” will not be winning the championship. Looks like the T will go to North regardless. Pretty amazing that BC will have two.

What is a super team?

UNC with all their super seniors and secret weapon grad transfers

Why do you even post your nonsense?

Syracuse had 6 grad students on the field today, 1 of the 6 was a grad transfer (they would have had 8 if not for injuries). UNC played 4 grad students 1 of the 4 was a grad transfer.

So I guess Syracuse would be considered the super team (although I don’t know about NU).

It is really funny how ignorant people pop off on here.

Just checked, Northwestern played 2 grad students one was a grad transfer, BC played just one grad student.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

It’s going to be great final Sunday. We’ll have a first time champion. Congratulations Boston College and Syracuse.

Should be a great game! So happy a “super team” will not be winning the championship. Looks like the T will go to North regardless. Pretty amazing that BC will have two.

What is a super team?

UNC with all their super seniors and secret weapon grad transfers

Why do you even post your nonsense?

Syracuse had 6 grad students on the field today, 1 of the 6 was a grad transfer (they would have had 8 if not for injuries). UNC played 4 grad students 1 of the 4 was a grad transfer.

So I guess Syracuse would be considered the super team (although I don’t know about NU).

It is really funny how ignorant people pop off on here.

BC had one! What does it all mean?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

It’s going to be great final Sunday. We’ll have a first time champion. Congratulations Boston College and Syracuse.

Should be a great game! So happy a “super team” will not be winning the championship. Looks like the T will go to North regardless. Pretty amazing that BC will have two.

What is a super team?

UNC with all their super seniors and secret weapon grad transfers

Why do you even post your nonsense?

Syracuse had 6 grad students on the field today, 1 of the 6 was a grad transfer (they would have had 8 if not for injuries). UNC played 4 grad students 1 of the 4 was a grad transfer.

So I guess Syracuse would be considered the super team (although I don’t know about NU).

It is really funny how ignorant people pop off on here.

BC had one! What does it all mean?

It doesn’t mean anything. Not sure why the guy wrote the post stating that he was “so happy a super team will not be winning the championship”. Apparently the comment was directed at UNC, the person seemed to be bothered that Carolina had “super seniors and secret weapon grad transfers”. I guess it didn’t bother them that Syracuse played the most super seniors and grad transfer.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by baldbear

It’s going to be great final Sunday. We’ll have a first time champion. Congratulations Boston College and Syracuse.

Should be a great game! So happy a “super team” will not be winning the championship. Looks like the T will go to North regardless. Pretty amazing that BC will have two.

What is a super team?

UNC with all their super seniors and secret weapon grad transfers

Why do you even post your nonsense?

Syracuse had 6 grad students on the field today, 1 of the 6 was a grad transfer (they would have had 8 if not for injuries). UNC played 4 grad students 1 of the 4 was a grad transfer.

So I guess Syracuse would be considered the super team (although I don’t know about NU).

It is really funny how ignorant people pop off on here.

BC had one! What does it all mean?

BC girl will receive the programs second Tewaaraton winner in a couple weeks. It means the program is elite.

Congrats to BC and Syracuse. Great showing by LI girls. 7 of 11 BC goals and 14 out of 21 Syracuse goals scored by LI girls...

Just watched UNC vs UVA Men’s Game... Just like with Syracuse and Boston College... Goalie and defense were the difference. Let’s see what happens with Duke vs Maryland Men .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Congrats to BC and Syracuse. Great showing by LI girls. 7 of 11 BC goals and 14 out of 21 Syracuse goals scored by LI girls...

And I’m fairly sure all but one player that scored were a YJ.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Just watched UNC vs UVA Men’s Game... Just like with Syracuse and Boston College... Goalie and defense were the difference. Let’s see what happens with Duke vs Maryland Men .

Terps held Duke to 5 goals.... Goalie and team D!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Congrats to BC and Syracuse. Great showing by LI girls. 7 of 11 BC goals and 14 out of 21 Syracuse goals scored by LI girls...

And I’m fairly sure all but one player that scored were a YJ.

I’m also fairly sure that the best player in women’s lacrosse this year is not a YJ!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Congrats to BC and Syracuse. Great showing by LI girls. 7 of 11 BC goals and 14 out of 21 Syracuse goals scored by LI girls...

And I’m fairly sure all but one player that scored were a YJ.

I’m also fairly sure that the best player in women’s lacrosse this year is not a YJ!

Agree, and I’m the same person that wrote the above post.

Congratulations to Boston College. They attacked Syracuse zone well, maybe seeing it for the fourth time helped. North showed why she’s best in the game. Walker-W had a good game plan. I’ll have to watch game again to see the officiating as it’s hard to see live but some calls head scratching.

BC a young team. Does North come back?

Considering the question marks coming into the season due to COVID I would say the season was quite a success.

Once again, it was clearly Defense, goalie play as well as taking control of the "middle of the field" in the second half (winning on the circle to get the DC) that was the difference in the Championship Game. I'm sure the know nothing who says that "defense wins championships" and "control the middle of the field" are cliche will still not get it. If you you do not get it by now my guess is that you never will. Those that do not get it know nothing about lacrosse or competitive sports in general.

Todays game changed when BC sent a double on 44 early in the second half, they made the stop got the turnover and never looked back. They controlled the middle of the field in the second half and they made the stops defensively.
SU couldn't get a draw off the circle, couldn't make a defensive stop and the Goalie (who is obviously excellent) had trouble making a big save). I don't know if BC made better adjustments at the half but at the end of the day the difference in the game was: Goalie play, team D and BC's ability to control the middle of the field. Oh, and BTW it was once again a Man to Man D that won the championship. SU's zone can be frustrating but as with most zones, good coaches with selfless, smart, talented players will eventually exploit it. If you have the athletes, man to man is tougher to beat because you need to be more athletic than the defenders to beat them one on one, someone needs to be able to win their one on one match up if you want to score some goals.

Congratulations To BC, AW and all of the players.

Pretty sure North walks away with the T. Congratulations to her.

Originally Posted by baldbear

Congratulations to Boston College. They attacked Syracuse zone well, maybe seeing it for the fourth time helped. North showed why she’s best in the game. Walker-W had a good game plan. I’ll have to watch game again to see the officiating as it’s hard to see live but some calls head scratching.

BC a young team. Does North come back?

Considering the question marks coming into the season due to COVID I would say the season was quite a success.

Officiating did not look good....

I would bet the ranch on CN returning.

Thug ball does not win championships. Syracuse learned that the hard way. Glad the refs had no patience for it!

Great win by BC. But three yellows in first 10 minutes? Top scorer out of game. Right or wrong it had an impact on game. North yellow was garbage as well.

Two things I missed. Congratulations to North for breaking the single season goal record. Also, hats off to Towson for hosting.

Getting ready to drive up 95, swing into Philly and get a cheesesteak at Jim’s on South St.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Great win by BC. But three yellows in first 10 minutes? Top scorer out of game. Right or wrong it had an impact on game. North yellow was garbage as well.

Simple put, officiating was not very good.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow! Very telling games today. Great effort by SB was really rooting for them. I'm thinking it's going to be either NW or BC. Both North and Scane were lights out, the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two phenomenal players. Can't wait for next week's finale

Your comments shows your complete lack of knowledge . We get it you dislike Ortega but what would make you think BC makes the finals because they beat ND who 2 weeks ago gave up 18 straight goals against UNC . If North wins the Tewaaraton then the award should stand for something different .

Don't dislike Ortega at all. She's a great player and played very well today. The other two are notch up in my opinion, and their teams had dominant wins, where UNC barely survived as a number 1 seed. We'll see what happens next week.

Your comment is ridiculous and based on nonsense . You seem to use seeding against UNC yet they would not be a one seed without Ortega . I could be wrong but UNC is undefeated having won both the regular season ACC title and the ACC tournament . I can guarantee you UNC does not faceguard North while BC will Ortega or Hoeg or both . The reason I bring this up is you cannot base your “ knowledge of the game “ on who scores more goals or points as who you play and how they play the game matters . To say the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two is just uneducated .

Umm... you’ll see I’m right in a couple weeks!

Just like I said. Not so ridiculous , was I?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Wow! Very telling games today. Great effort by SB was really rooting for them. I'm thinking it's going to be either NW or BC. Both North and Scane were lights out, the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two phenomenal players. Can't wait for next week's finale

Your comments shows your complete lack of knowledge . We get it you dislike Ortega but what would make you think BC makes the finals because they beat ND who 2 weeks ago gave up 18 straight goals against UNC . If North wins the Tewaaraton then the award should stand for something different .

Don't dislike Ortega at all. She's a great player and played very well today. The other two are notch up in my opinion, and their teams had dominant wins, where UNC barely survived as a number 1 seed. We'll see what happens next week.

Your comment is ridiculous and based on nonsense . You seem to use seeding against UNC yet they would not be a one seed without Ortega . I could be wrong but UNC is undefeated having won both the regular season ACC title and the ACC tournament . I can guarantee you UNC does not faceguard North while BC will Ortega or Hoeg or both . The reason I bring this up is you cannot base your “ knowledge of the game “ on who scores more goals or points as who you play and how they play the game matters . To say the Tewaaraton is clearly between those two is just uneducated .

Umm... you’ll see I’m right in a couple weeks!

Just like I said. Not so ridiculous , was I?

You got that right!!! :-)

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Thug ball does not win championships. Syracuse learned that the hard way. Glad the refs had no patience for it!

My girl is in 6th but never seen a yellow card in gLax. I assume it’s because of the no checking rule/ less physicality in youth lax. Is it more prevalent in HS and college? Also, don’t they know to take it down a notch after the first yellow like they do in soccer?

Not the OP, but I'm still not convinced North should be the Tewaaraton winner. She is tremendously athletic and incredibly driven. I think she's a role model for all competitive female athletes, lacrosse or otherwise. That said, I'm not overly impressed with her lacrosse _skills_ outside the draw circle (she's phenomenal there as well). She wins because she's stronger, faster, and has more grit than any other player. She does have incredible Lax IQ as well. I guess I'm just not that impressed with her handle. I think a Tewaaraton winner should have a handle to match the name. My 2 cents.

When do we start to find out who is coming back for the fifth year Option on these teams?
How will start affecting the next class of recruits. I can see schools not taking chances on kids and only going for “sure things”

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Not the OP, but I'm still not convinced North should be the Tewaaraton winner. She is tremendously athletic and incredibly driven. I think she's a role model for all competitive female athletes, lacrosse or otherwise. That said, I'm not overly impressed with her lacrosse _skills_ outside the draw circle (she's phenomenal there as well). She wins because she's stronger, faster, and has more grit than any other player. She does have incredible Lax IQ as well. I guess I'm just not that impressed with her handle. I think a Tewaaraton winner should have a handle to match the name. My 2 cents.

So? Nonsense.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Not the OP, but I'm still not convinced North should be the Tewaaraton winner. She is tremendously athletic and incredibly driven. I think she's a role model for all competitive female athletes, lacrosse or otherwise. That said, I'm not overly impressed with her lacrosse _skills_ outside the draw circle (she's phenomenal there as well). She wins because she's stronger, faster, and has more grit than any other player. She does have incredible Lax IQ as well. I guess I'm just not that impressed with her handle. I think a Tewaaraton winner should have a handle to match the name. My 2 cents.

So? Nonsense.

Outside the draw circle!? you have to be kidding...she had 102 goals in one season. I guess in your mind she hangs by the goal looking for feeds

North should be the winner. She is most complete player on the field. She also makes others around her better. She creates so many slides that others benefit greatly by how defense have to prep for her game.

On a second note US lacrosse/NCAA need to have instant reply added next season for Women’s lacrosse. It is more important to get calls right than speed of game. This weekend there were a few calls that should have been reviewed. I think limit reviews to following-
-Any goal
-Any goal circle infraction-after shot, pushed in goal circle
-Dangerous propel, follow through and shot. A couple things here I think need to be looked at overall. Did the player fake it? Was there contact? Did ball hit something before player?(we have too many players moving into path of ball when beat. That needs to be looked at in the overall rules. This is also and issue for dangerous follow through. If player is in thier motion already it shouldn’t be a penalty.

Just a few thoughts..Have a great summer

Originally Posted by Anonymous

North should be the winner. She is most complete player on the field. She also makes others around her better. She creates so many slides that others benefit greatly by how defense have to prep for her game.

On a second note US lacrosse/NCAA need to have instant reply added next season for Women’s lacrosse. It is more important to get calls right than speed of game. This weekend there were a few calls that should have been reviewed. I think limit reviews to following-
-Any goal
-Any goal circle infraction-after shot, pushed in goal circle
-Dangerous propel, follow through and shot. A couple things here I think need to be looked at overall. Did the player fake it? Was there contact? Did ball hit something before player?(we have too many players moving into path of ball when beat. That needs to be looked at in the overall rules. This is also and issue for dangerous follow through. If player is in thier motion already it shouldn’t be a penalty.

Just a few thoughts..Have a great summer

Great suggestions to enhance the integrity of the game!

Instant replay is a lot harder than it appears. Forget regular season games. The technology and money for that technology is not available. The semifinal and finals have ESPN doing the transmission but even what they bring to the games falls short of what needs to be in place. I watched a replay of the game and there were at least six bad calls. Just don’t use that crew again.

There were a ton of bad calls in the semi - final game as well. In a close game those bad calls can determine the outcome. Just be consistent.

All schools have what you need for instant replay. They have the technology at every university they streams games. We see it every day with all other NCAA sports. It needs to be put in place for next year. The piont is if they don’t have a good view of it then don’t overturn it. Big games in May ESPN has great views as we saw yesterday on goal that didn’t count, and the many pushes into goal circle that were called wrong.

And I also detest the two whistles between the 30s. What a joke. Talk about slow down a fast break, and reward the defense. I still would love to see more timed fouls. Push in the back with possession is 1 minute green card. Doesn’t account against yellows. It would clean game up.

Another 2 rules that need to change and would align with the men.
- If there is a foul on the draw or a violation, the 8 girls on the defensive end should have to hold in the box until the whistle. The team receiving the ball due to a foul shouldn't have to get it past the attackers as well as the middies to get the ball over the restraining line
- If a team is up a girl due a card at the end of the half and holds the ball they should start the second half with possession of the ball.

I really like the two additions above. I would also
Add get ball in attacking zone with 60 seconds on shot clock(so 30 seconds to clear). Haven’t watched men’s in a while I liked that rule in championship yesterday getting ball over midline in 20 seconds. Speeds up game as well and rewards a team with a good redefend.

US lacrosse needs to really look at rules and say who does this rule help, Offense or defense? Then adjust accordingly. I agree with the two whistles between 30s. Only helps defense, and it is a defense of penalty(say that to yourself twice)

They want to speed up game which we all agree they have done a great job, but now they need to go back and take the next step. I like the idea of timed penalties. Remove the cards except for dangerous shots that hit some one or follow through.
The women’s game and how it is being played now needs a re boot on rules. So far great improvement to the game, hopefully they will evolve further this year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I really like the two additions above. I would also
Add get ball in attacking zone with 60 seconds on shot clock(so 30 seconds to clear). Haven’t watched men’s in a while I liked that rule in championship yesterday getting ball over midline in 20 seconds. Speeds up game as well and rewards a team with a good redefend.

US lacrosse needs to really look at rules and say who does this rule help, Offense or defense? Then adjust accordingly. I agree with the two whistles between 30s. Only helps defense, and it is a defense of penalty(say that to yourself twice)

They want to speed up game which we all agree they have done a great job, but now they need to go back and take the next step. I like the idea of timed penalties. Remove the cards except for dangerous shots that hit some one or follow through.
The women’s game and how it is being played now needs a re boot on rules. So far great improvement to the game, hopefully they will evolve further this year.

Understand a “re-look” at some of the new rules. The problem with a lot of these ideas is you want to give game officials more to look for. Most refs are terrible at best. Most don’t know the rules as they are. Giving refs more “power” to influence games I’m afraid will cause more problems. The ghost fouls in the 8-meter have ruined many a game. Did Tyrell really need to be tossed from the game? The head bob/flop has become epidemic to the game. Playing defense is virtually impossible if you implemented more fouls/timed penalties. Maybe look at the other side. I do agree some changes can be made but be careful of u intended consequences.

I do agree with more power to influence games could be an issue. I do believe the ability to review plays will make the game better. Between a couple rule updates, and ability to review could just help move game to a better place. Accountability is key.

Just catching up. I just watched BC v UNC . Great game by BC. However I see the issue with refs on both sides of teams. There is always a discretion calls. But they need Instant replay badly. I point bringing up fouls, yellows etc..as this is always subjective.

Two major screw ups in final minute(clock stops) with refs that has nothing to do with discretion or refs. If they have replay clock would have been corrected. Time for women’s lax to up the game.

1)UNC doubling. Ball goes out of bounds at 33.8 clock ticks to 28.0(6 seconds lost. When play resumed 28 seconds on clock.

2) KH has ball inadvertent whistle , clocks goes from 11.4 to 8.3-3 seconds lost. When play resumed 8.3 on clock

That is almost 10 seconds lost on clock that if they had replay would be added back.

Note -Gait had 8 seconds put back on clock in NW game at 27:56 mark. How were they able to add this back with no replay???? Bench ref on it????

Just add replay to increase integrity of game to next level.

Overall a great college season even with Covid. Great job by all teams and kids to preserve through it.

2021 Final Coaches Poll

1 - Boston College

2 - Syracuse

3 - North Carolina

4 - Northwestern

5 - Stony Brook

6 - Notre Dame

7 - Florida

8 - Duke

9 - Loyola Maryland

10 - Maryland

11 - Virginia

12 - James Madison

13 - Denver

14 - Rutgers

15 - Drexel

16 - Stanford

17 - Johns Hopkins

18 - Jacksonville

19 - Temple

20 - Massachusetts

21 - UConn

22 - Towson

T-23 - Hofstra

T-23 - Penn State

25 - Louisville

Originally Posted by Anonymous

For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is.

I'm not the original poster... But here you go, for what it is worth.... cut and paste...

Listed below are the Top 10 Teams in terms of how many Under Armour All-Americans the program brought in from 2016 - 2020 (current freshman - 5th year)

1 - North Carolina - 23

2 - Maryland - 20

3 - Syracuse - 18

4 - Florida - 14
5 - Notre Dame - 14

6 - Northwestern - 12
7 - Virginia - 12

8 - Boston College - 11

9 - Duke - 10
10 - Stanford - 10

Listed below is the 2021 Final Top 10 Ranking (coaches poll).

1 - Boston College

2 - Syracuse

3 - North Carolina

4 - Northwestern

5 - Stony Brook

6 - Notre Dame

7 - Florida

8 - Duke

9 - Loyola Maryland

10 - Maryland

Eight of the Final Top 10 teams just happen to be teams that were in the Top 10 for bringing in UA All-Americans....

Also worth noting, Loyola who finished the year ranked 9th in the Poll brought in 9 UA AA's which put them at #11 in terms of AA's.

Virginia who was also in the Top 10 with UA All-Americans finished the season Ranked 11th in the coaches poll.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is.

I'm not the original poster... But here you go, for what it is worth.... cut and paste...

Listed below are the Top 10 Teams in terms of how many Under Armour All-Americans the program brought in from 2016 - 2020 (current freshman - 5th year)

1 - North Carolina - 23

2 - Maryland - 20

3 - Syracuse - 18

4 - Florida - 14
5 - Notre Dame - 14

6 - Northwestern - 12
7 - Virginia - 12

8 - Boston College - 11

9 - Duke - 10
10 - Stanford - 10

Listed below is the 2021 Final Top 10 Ranking (coaches poll).

1 - Boston College

2 - Syracuse

3 - North Carolina

4 - Northwestern

5 - Stony Brook

6 - Notre Dame

7 - Florida

8 - Duke

9 - Loyola Maryland

10 - Maryland

Eight of the Final Top 10 teams just happen to be teams that were in the Top 10 for bringing in UA All-Americans....

Also worth noting, Loyola who finished the year ranked 9th in the Poll brought in 9 UA AA's which put them at #11 in terms of AA's.

Virginia who was also in the Top 10 with UA All-Americans finished the season Ranked 11th in the coaches poll.

People have way too much time on their hands

Originally Posted by Anonymous

For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is.

I'm not the original poster... But here you go, for what it is worth.... cut and paste...

Listed below are the Top 10 Teams in terms of how many Under Armour All-Americans the program brought in from 2016 - 2020 (current freshman - 5th year)

1 - North Carolina - 23

2 - Maryland - 20

3 - Syracuse - 18

4 - Florida - 14
5 - Notre Dame - 14

6 - Northwestern - 12
7 - Virginia - 12

8 - Boston College - 11

9 - Duke - 10
10 - Stanford - 10

Listed below is the 2021 Final Top 10 Ranking (coaches poll).

1 - Boston College

2 - Syracuse

3 - North Carolina

4 - Northwestern

5 - Stony Brook

6 - Notre Dame

7 - Florida

8 - Duke

9 - Loyola Maryland

10 - Maryland

Eight of the Final Top 10 teams just happen to be teams that were in the Top 10 for bringing in UA All-Americans....

Also worth noting, Loyola who finished the year ranked 9th in the Poll brought in 9 UA AA's which put them at #11 in terms of AA's.

Virginia who was also in the Top 10 with UA All-Americans finished the season Ranked 11th in the coaches poll.

People have way too much time on their hands

I guess you are one of the people.

I am hoping we have a ref on this link-

Dangerous Follow through- your stick has to make contact with opposing team-I think that one is easy

Dangerous Propel-any shoot deemed out of control or deemed dangerous. This is my question. It seems as if especially in the college game as long as you don’t hit someone with your shot anything pretty much goes? Is this the new rule? It sure seems like it. I see shots taken with no regard to where it is going, BTBs where they have no idea who is behind them, shoots over defenders heads.

So is it safe to say your stick or ball has to hit someone to get here calls? If not this rule is lost

Second is Cradling in the Sphere-why does this rule even exist. It is never called, but is the most abused call in the game. Everytime a player is in trouble they immediately cradle in sphere. But what is called is check in sphere. I don’t get it?? What happen first was the cradle in sphere.

Just wanted to get some feedback on these two rules.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is.

I'm not the original poster... But here you go, for what it is worth.... cut and paste...

Listed below are the Top 10 Teams in terms of how many Under Armour All-Americans the program brought in from 2016 - 2020 (current freshman - 5th year)

1 - North Carolina - 23

2 - Maryland - 20

3 - Syracuse - 18

4 - Florida - 14
5 - Notre Dame - 14

6 - Northwestern - 12
7 - Virginia - 12

8 - Boston College - 11

9 - Duke - 10
10 - Stanford - 10

Listed below is the 2021 Final Top 10 Ranking (coaches poll).

1 - Boston College

2 - Syracuse

3 - North Carolina

4 - Northwestern

5 - Stony Brook

6 - Notre Dame

7 - Florida

8 - Duke

9 - Loyola Maryland

10 - Maryland

Eight of the Final Top 10 teams just happen to be teams that were in the Top 10 for bringing in UA All-Americans....

Also worth noting, Loyola who finished the year ranked 9th in the Poll brought in 9 UA AA's which put them at #11 in terms of AA's.

Virginia who was also in the Top 10 with UA All-Americans finished the season Ranked 11th in the coaches poll.

In other words, UNC and Maryland can easily field their starting lineups with only UAAAs and still not win a NC or even conference in Maryland's case. BC did it pulling in only half the number UAAAs. JMU won in 2018 with I'm guessing zero UAAAs. Stony Brook has come so close to making the final four with hardly any UAAAs. Notre Dame sure didn't look good post season for a team with all those UAAAs! Penn State and USC get their fair share of UAAAs yet unranked or barely ranked by end of this season. Denver beat Stanford in the tournament with zero UAAAs.

Thanks for taking the time to research and prove the point every reasonable wlax fan has tried to make: yes, almost all the players named UAAA are very good and deserving but some other very good players get overlooked (case in point this year, Emma Ward) and it's possible to be a top program without many or even any UAAAs.

Congratulations to 2021Tewaaraton Award winner Charlotte North!

Originally Posted by baldbear

Congratulations to 2021Tewaaraton Award winner Charlotte North!

What he said.... :-)

Originally Posted by Anonymous

For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is.

I'm not the original poster... But here you go, for what it is worth.... cut and paste...

Listed below are the Top 10 Teams in terms of how many Under Armour All-Americans the program brought in from 2016 - 2020 (current freshman - 5th year)

1 - North Carolina - 23

2 - Maryland - 20

3 - Syracuse - 18

4 - Florida - 14
5 - Notre Dame - 14

6 - Northwestern - 12
7 - Virginia - 12

8 - Boston College - 11

9 - Duke - 10
10 - Stanford - 10

Listed below is the 2021 Final Top 10 Ranking (coaches poll).

1 - Boston College

2 - Syracuse

3 - North Carolina

4 - Northwestern

5 - Stony Brook

6 - Notre Dame

7 - Florida

8 - Duke

9 - Loyola Maryland

10 - Maryland

Eight of the Final Top 10 teams just happen to be teams that were in the Top 10 for bringing in UA All-Americans....

Also worth noting, Loyola who finished the year ranked 9th in the Poll brought in 9 UA AA's which put them at #11 in terms of AA's.

Virginia who was also in the Top 10 with UA All-Americans finished the season Ranked 11th in the coaches poll.

In other words, UNC and Maryland can easily field their starting lineups with only UAAAs and still not win a NC or even conference in Maryland's case. BC did it pulling in only half the number UAAAs. JMU won in 2018 with I'm guessing zero UAAAs. Stony Brook has come so close to making the final four with hardly any UAAAs. Notre Dame sure didn't look good post season for a team with all those UAAAs! Penn State and USC get their fair share of UAAAs yet unranked or barely ranked by end of this season. Denver beat Stanford in the tournament with zero UAAAs.

Thanks for taking the time to research and prove the point every reasonable wlax fan has tried to make: yes, almost all the players named UAAA are very good and deserving but some other very good players get overlooked (case in point this year, Emma Ward) and it's possible to be a top program without many or even any UAAAs.

I do not think anyone said that a program can not be competitive (or a top program) without UA players nor did anyone say that there are not very good players who get overlooked. The guy (or girl) was just pointing out that just maybe the folks who select the players for the UA Senior Game do know what they are doing.

Whenever a "team" or "ranking" comes out there are always people who want to knock it. They do it with Under Armour, UA Underclass, Team USA, IL recruit rankings etc.... Most of the time it's sour grapes.

If true, Like or dislike him women’s lacrosse is losing a HUGE person who pushed the game forward. Between Sticks, stringing, innovative, strategy, concepts, training he changed the game. He was a huge advocate for the women’s game and change.

I know people will be critical that he didn’t win a Natty, but many he coached and taught did.(AW, KAH, CR)

He will win quickly in the men’s game.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If true, Like or dislike him women’s lacrosse is losing a HUGE person who pushed the game forward. Between Sticks, stringing, innovative, strategy, concepts, training he changed the game. He was a huge advocate for the women’s game and change.

I know people will be critical that he didn’t win a Natty, but many he coached and taught did.(AW, KAH, CR)

He will win quickly in the men’s game.

This is a huge win for the men's team, but obviously a huge loss for the women's team. Big shoes to fill - it'll be interesting to see who gets the job. Like it or not, girls commit to Syracuse to play for him, big loss.

Spallina to Cuse Womans Lax? would be a home-run hire.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Spallina to Cuse Womans Lax? would be a home-run hire.

I think it will be a woman and Syracuse Alumni.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is.

I'm not the original poster... But here you go, for what it is worth.... cut and paste...

Listed below are the Top 10 Teams in terms of how many Under Armour All-Americans the program brought in from 2016 - 2020 (current freshman - 5th year)

1 - North Carolina - 23

2 - Maryland - 20

3 - Syracuse - 18

4 - Florida - 14
5 - Notre Dame - 14

6 - Northwestern - 12
7 - Virginia - 12

8 - Boston College - 11

9 - Duke - 10
10 - Stanford - 10

Listed below is the 2021 Final Top 10 Ranking (coaches poll).

1 - Boston College

2 - Syracuse

3 - North Carolina

4 - Northwestern

5 - Stony Brook

6 - Notre Dame

7 - Florida

8 - Duke

9 - Loyola Maryland

10 - Maryland

Eight of the Final Top 10 teams just happen to be teams that were in the Top 10 for bringing in UA All-Americans....

Also worth noting, Loyola who finished the year ranked 9th in the Poll brought in 9 UA AA's which put them at #11 in terms of AA's.

Virginia who was also in the Top 10 with UA All-Americans finished the season Ranked 11th in the coaches poll.

In other words, UNC and Maryland can easily field their starting lineups with only UAAAs and still not win a NC or even conference in Maryland's case. BC did it pulling in only half the number UAAAs. JMU won in 2018 with I'm guessing zero UAAAs. Stony Brook has come so close to making the final four with hardly any UAAAs. Notre Dame sure didn't look good post season for a team with all those UAAAs! Penn State and USC get their fair share of UAAAs yet unranked or barely ranked by end of this season. Denver beat Stanford in the tournament with zero UAAAs.

Thanks for taking the time to research and prove the point every reasonable wlax fan has tried to make: yes, almost all the players named UAAA are very good and deserving but some other very good players get overlooked (case in point this year, Emma Ward) and it's possible to be a top program without many or even any UAAAs.

I do not think anyone said that a program can not be competitive (or a top program) without UA players nor did anyone say that there are not very good players who get overlooked. The guy (or girl) was just pointing out that just maybe the folks who select the players for the UA Senior Game do know what they are doing.

Whenever a "team" or "ranking" comes out there are always people who want to knock it. They do it with Under Armour, UA Underclass, Team USA, IL recruit rankings etc.... Most of the time it's sour grapes.

The second to the top quote says, "In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is." The numbers presented says otherwise, but everyone is entitled to their own interpretation.

Regarding the UA discussion and the quote: "In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is."

My interpretation is the the person was trying to say that the programs that tend to bring in the most UA All-Americans tend to be the most competitive programs. I did not read it as would win the championship or win vs every team with less UA players.

below is Copied from another discussion

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* "To put things in perspective... Someone defined Top DI schools as "Top 10 Ranked schools". If we look at the past 5 full seasons of play, 2015 - 2019 and look at the Final Rankings there were a total of 20 teams that were ranked in the Top 10. Below is the list of teams that finished in the Top 10 (also listed How many year the team finished in the top 20)

Maryland - 5x Top 10
North Carolina - 5X Top 10

Boston College - 4X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Princeton - 4X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Syracuse - 4X Top 10 (5X Top 20)

Northwestern - 3X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Florida - 3X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Stony Brook - 3X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Virginia - 2X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Penn - 1X Top 10 (5X Top 20)

I would say the above are Top 10 Programs as they have finished in the Top 10 and are also finish in the Top 20 every year.

The teams listed below have also finished in the Top 10 but seem to be less consistent as they do not always finish in the Top 20.

Penn State - 3X Top 10 (4X Top 20)
Notre Dame - 2X Top 10 (4X Top 20)

Loyola - 2X Top 10 (3X Top 20)
USC - 2X Top 10 (3X Top 20)
Navy - 2X Top 10 (3X Top 20)

Stanford - 1X Top 10 (3X Top 20)
JMU - 1X Top 10 "National Champion" (3X Top 20)
Duke - 1X Top 10 (2X Top 20)
Towson - 1X Top 10 (2X Top 20)
Denver - 1X Top 10 (2X Top 20)"*
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The most competitive programs bring in more talent than other schools. Whether they are UA All-Americans or not the vast majority of players who are offered a spot at the Top Programs are very very good players. When a non UA player walks in and starts or plays in every game as a freshmen at one of the top programs... Yes, they could have been on the UA team, I'm sure they were deserving.

From what I can tell, it looks like there is definitely some correlation .... it looks like the programs that consistently out perform 85 - 90% of the programs every year and are consistently in the Top 10 or Top 20 are mostly the teams that bring in the most UA players. 7 of those top 10 programs are also in the top 10 with UA players.

That said, the real correlation is between how many "legit players" a program brings in and how competitive the program is. There are great players who do not make UA and there are great players that do make UA...
The thing most of them have in common is that they go to the best programs.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Regarding the UA discussion and the quote: "In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is."

My interpretation is the the person was trying to say that the programs that tend to bring in the most UA All-Americans tend to be the most competitive programs. I did not read it as would win the championship or win vs every team with less UA players.

below is Copied from another discussion

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* "To put things in perspective... Someone defined Top DI schools as "Top 10 Ranked schools". If we look at the past 5 full seasons of play, 2015 - 2019 and look at the Final Rankings there were a total of 20 teams that were ranked in the Top 10. Below is the list of teams that finished in the Top 10 (also listed How many year the team finished in the top 20)

Maryland - 5x Top 10
North Carolina - 5X Top 10

Boston College - 4X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Princeton - 4X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Syracuse - 4X Top 10 (5X Top 20)

Northwestern - 3X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Florida - 3X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Stony Brook - 3X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Virginia - 2X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Penn - 1X Top 10 (5X Top 20)

I would say the above are Top 10 Programs as they have finished in the Top 10 and are also finish in the Top 20 every year.

The teams listed below have also finished in the Top 10 but seem to be less consistent as they do not always finish in the Top 20.

Penn State - 3X Top 10 (4X Top 20)
Notre Dame - 2X Top 10 (4X Top 20)

Loyola - 2X Top 10 (3X Top 20)
USC - 2X Top 10 (3X Top 20)
Navy - 2X Top 10 (3X Top 20)

Stanford - 1X Top 10 (3X Top 20)
JMU - 1X Top 10 "National Champion" (3X Top 20)
Duke - 1X Top 10 (2X Top 20)
Towson - 1X Top 10 (2X Top 20)
Denver - 1X Top 10 (2X Top 20)"*
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The most competitive programs bring in more talent than other schools. Whether they are UA All-Americans or not the vast majority of players who are offered a spot at the Top Programs are very very good players. When a non UA player walks in and starts or plays in every game as a freshmen at one of the top programs... Yes, they could have been on the UA team, I'm sure they were deserving.

From what I can tell, it looks like there is definitely some correlation .... it looks like the programs that consistently out perform 85 - 90% of the programs every year and are consistently in the Top 10 or Top 20 are mostly the teams that bring in the most UA players. 7 of those top 10 programs are also in the top 10 with UA players.

That said, the real correlation is between how many "legit players" a program brings in and how competitive the program is. There are great players who do not make UA and there are great players that do make UA...
The thing most of them have in common is that they go to the best programs.

Rarely if ever do programs not listed above challenge to be a Top 10 or even top 20 team. The common denominator is talent. The top teams simply have more talent. Combine talent with good or great coaching and you have a chance to win a championship. There will always be deserving players who do not get selected because there are a limited number of spots “44”. Position plays a role as well, a player could be one of the Top 10 goalies if they only take 4 the player is out of luck.... same goes for the other positions.

The original post did not try to disparage players who are not selected, it only pointed out that many of the players that did make it were very good players. Pretty sure the reason for the post was to combat the many posts over the years that have been critical of UA.

It has been said on here many times, “the only list that really matters is the college coaches lists.” Some players fall through the cracks but for the most part the top programs appear to consistently identify the top talent.

Rational people realize that there are more than 44 exceptional seniors.

Will Joe Spallina go to Syracuse!?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Will Joe Spallina go to Syracuse!?

Just read an article that said SU offered job to SU Alum / BC Assistant Coach but she turned it down... anything is possible but there are some additional SU Alumni that are probably being considered. IMHO JS would be a great hire.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Will Joe Spallina go to Syracuse!?

Just read an article that said SU offered job to SU Alum / BC Assistant Coach but she turned it down... anything is possible but there are some additional SU Alumni that are probably being considered. IMHO JS would be a great hire.

A program like Syracuse, in my opinion, will hire a proven head coach, I doubt that whom ever they hire that this will be their first HC job.
Albany HC was star at SU
Wagner HC was star at SU
Pat Mcabe was a star at SU coached Adelphi womens to several Nat Championships

Congratulations to All who earned All-American Honors.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/iwlca-announces-women-s-division-i-all-americans/58068

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Will Joe Spallina go to Syracuse!?

Just read an article that said SU offered job to SU Alum / BC Assistant Coach but she turned it down... anything is possible but there are some additional SU Alumni that are probably being considered. IMHO JS would be a great hire.

A program like Syracuse, in my opinion, will hire a proven head coach, I doubt that whom ever they hire that this will be their first HC job.
Albany HC was star at SU
Wagner HC was star at SU
Pat Mcabe was a star at SU coached Adelphi womens to several Nat Championships

When Gait came in, he had been the Assistant coach at MD.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Will Joe Spallina go to Syracuse!?

Just read an article that said SU offered job to SU Alum / BC Assistant Coach but she turned it down... anything is possible but there are some additional SU Alumni that are probably being considered. IMHO JS would be a great hire.

A program like Syracuse, in my opinion, will hire a proven head coach, I doubt that whom ever they hire that this will be their first HC job.
Albany HC was star at SU
Wagner HC was star at SU
Pat Mcabe was a star at SU coached Adelphi womens to several Nat Championships

When Gait came in, he had been the Assistant coach at MD.

All I know it would be hard for any coach to turndown an ACC HC role. I think Spallina would win a National title there.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Will Joe Spallina go to Syracuse!?

Just read an article that said SU offered job to SU Alum / BC Assistant Coach but she turned it down... anything is possible but there are some additional SU Alumni that are probably being considered. IMHO JS would be a great hire.

A program like Syracuse, in my opinion, will hire a proven head coach, I doubt that whom ever they hire that this will be their first HC job.
Albany HC was star at SU
Wagner HC was star at SU
Pat Mcabe was a star at SU coached Adelphi womens to several Nat Championships

When Gait came in, he had been the Assistant coach at MD.

The Syracuse women's program did not have much history at all when Gary took over. It's a completely different situation now taking over the program he built.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Will Joe Spallina go to Syracuse!?

Just read an article that said SU offered job to SU Alum / BC Assistant Coach but she turned it down... anything is possible but there are some additional SU Alumni that are probably being considered. IMHO JS would be a great hire.

A program like Syracuse, in my opinion, will hire a proven head coach, I doubt that whom ever they hire that this will be their first HC job.
Albany HC was star at SU
Wagner HC was star at SU
Pat Mcabe was a star at SU coached Adelphi womens to several Nat Championships

When Gait came in, he had been the Assistant coach at MD.

The Syracuse women's program did not have much history at all when Gary took over. It's a completely different situation now taking over the program he built.

For the women sake, I hope Spallina doesn't end up there. To go from Gait to Spallina is heartbreaking.

"I have a big ego because I'm the best lacrosse player the world has ever seen."

"I have a big ego because I'm small and never made much of myself in sports. But I tan a lot and take a look at how white my teeth are."

Very different people.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Will Joe Spallina go to Syracuse!?

Just read an article that said SU offered job to SU Alum / BC Assistant Coach but she turned it down... anything is possible but there are some additional SU Alumni that are probably being considered. IMHO JS would be a great hire.

A program like Syracuse, in my opinion, will hire a proven head coach, I doubt that whom ever they hire that this will be their first HC job.
Albany HC was star at SU
Wagner HC was star at SU
Pat Mcabe was a star at SU coached Adelphi womens to several Nat Championships

When Gait came in, he had been the Assistant coach at MD.

The Syracuse women's program did not have much history at all when Gary took over. It's a completely different situation now taking over the program he built.

For the women sake, I hope Spallina doesn't end up there. To go from Gait to Spallina is heartbreaking.

"I have a big ego because I'm the best lacrosse player the world has ever seen."

"I have a big ego because I'm small and never made much of myself in sports. But I tan a lot and take a look at how white my teeth are."

Very different people.

He might go there to keep an eye on his superstar son, he also has a few other kids that are low-level recruits that he may be able to pull some strings for.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Will Joe Spallina go to Syracuse!?

Just read an article that said SU offered job to SU Alum / BC Assistant Coach but she turned it down... anything is possible but there are some additional SU Alumni that are probably being considered. IMHO JS would be a great hire.

A program like Syracuse, in my opinion, will hire a proven head coach, I doubt that whom ever they hire that this will be their first HC job.
Albany HC was star at SU
Wagner HC was star at SU
Pat Mcabe was a star at SU coached Adelphi womens to several Nat Championships

When Gait came in, he had been the Assistant coach at MD.

All I know it would be hard for any coach to turndown an ACC HC role. I think Spallina would win a National title there.

Would have to agree seeing success with SB with lesser talent I think he would get SYR over the top

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Regarding the UA discussion and the quote: "In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is."

My interpretation is the the person was trying to say that the programs that tend to bring in the most UA All-Americans tend to be the most competitive programs. I did not read it as would win the championship or win vs every team with less UA players.

below is Copied from another discussion

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* "To put things in perspective... Someone defined Top DI schools as "Top 10 Ranked schools". If we look at the past 5 full seasons of play, 2015 - 2019 and look at the Final Rankings there were a total of 20 teams that were ranked in the Top 10. Below is the list of teams that finished in the Top 10 (also listed How many year the team finished in the top 20)

Maryland - 5x Top 10
North Carolina - 5X Top 10

Boston College - 4X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Princeton - 4X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Syracuse - 4X Top 10 (5X Top 20)

Northwestern - 3X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Florida - 3X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Stony Brook - 3X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Virginia - 2X Top 10 (5X Top 20)
Penn - 1X Top 10 (5X Top 20)

I would say the above are Top 10 Programs as they have finished in the Top 10 and are also finish in the Top 20 every year.

The teams listed below have also finished in the Top 10 but seem to be less consistent as they do not always finish in the Top 20.

Penn State - 3X Top 10 (4X Top 20)
Notre Dame - 2X Top 10 (4X Top 20)

Loyola - 2X Top 10 (3X Top 20)
USC - 2X Top 10 (3X Top 20)
Navy - 2X Top 10 (3X Top 20)

Stanford - 1X Top 10 (3X Top 20)
JMU - 1X Top 10 "National Champion" (3X Top 20)
Duke - 1X Top 10 (2X Top 20)
Towson - 1X Top 10 (2X Top 20)
Denver - 1X Top 10 (2X Top 20)"*
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The most competitive programs bring in more talent than other schools. Whether they are UA All-Americans or not the vast majority of players who are offered a spot at the Top Programs are very very good players. When a non UA player walks in and starts or plays in every game as a freshmen at one of the top programs... Yes, they could have been on the UA team, I'm sure they were deserving.

From what I can tell, it looks like there is definitely some correlation .... it looks like the programs that consistently out perform 85 - 90% of the programs every year and are consistently in the Top 10 or Top 20 are mostly the teams that bring in the most UA players. 7 of those top 10 programs are also in the top 10 with UA players.

That said, the real correlation is between how many "legit players" a program brings in and how competitive the program is. There are great players who do not make UA and there are great players that do make UA...
The thing most of them have in common is that they go to the best programs.

Rarely if ever do programs not listed above challenge to be a Top 10 or even top 20 team. The common denominator is talent. The top teams simply have more talent. Combine talent with good or great coaching and you have a chance to win a championship. There will always be deserving players who do not get selected because there are a limited number of spots “44”. Position plays a role as well, a player could be one of the Top 10 goalies if they only take 4 the player is out of luck.... same goes for the other positions.

The original post did not try to disparage players who are not selected, it only pointed out that many of the players that did make it were very good players. Pretty sure the reason for the post was to combat the many posts over the years that have been critical of UA.

It has been said on here many times, “the only list that really matters is the college coaches lists.” Some players fall through the cracks but for the most part the top programs appear to consistently identify the top talent.

Rational people realize that there are more than 44 exceptional seniors.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse needs to drop out of the top 5. Northwestern is the clear #2 and might be number one. NW has the best player in the country, UNC has the next 2. Big drop off after that.

This didn’t age well now did it?????

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Izzy Scane or Jamie Ortega get it. Nobody else close

Hahaha. Not even close bud~John Bender

Exciting to see Clemson add lacrosse in the ACC!

Clemson is adding women's lacrosse in the 2022-23 season! Great for the sport and over the next few years-other southern schools are going to also be adding women's lacrosse. All those young lacrosse girls are going to have some fabulous opportunities!
https://www.thestate.com/sports/college/acc/clemson-university/article251998933.html

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

What is so “interesting”? Why identify one particular player? Why do people always say “many other deserving players “ ?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

Really? She is a fantastic player!!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

What is so “interesting”? Why identify one particular player? Why do people always say “many other deserving players “ ?

Because she is the only freshman and it could be argued that there is at least one other Freshman in her own conference that was more impactful on her teams' success.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

What is so “interesting”? Why identify one particular player? Why do people always say “many other deserving players “ ?

Because there are always deserving players left off any all star team. Not looking to knock this particular player because she is an incredible talent , but this team is supposed to be comprised of the best players in the world and based upon performance of some other players her selection over them is interesting.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

Really? She is a fantastic player!!!

Yes she is ..... But when you are invited to train with the best players in the world at such a young age, you should be head and shoulders above all others

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

What is so “interesting”? Why identify one particular player? Why do people always say “many other deserving players “ ?

Because she is the only freshman and it could be argued that there is at least one other Freshman in her own conference that was more impactful on her teams' success.

What does being a freshman have to do with it?

“it could be argued that there is at least one other Freshman in her own conference that was more impactful on her teams' success.”

It could be argued by who? You?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

Really? She is a fantastic player!!!

Yes she is ..... But when you are invited to train with the best players in the world at such a young age, you should be head and shoulders above all others

What does age have to do with it?

“Head and shoulders above all others”.

Please stop, no player is head and shoulders above all others. Not sure what your agenda is but IMHO you have very little if any knowledge of competitive team sports and athletes.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

What is so “interesting”? Why identify one particular player? Why do people always say “many other deserving players “ ?

Because she is the only freshman and it could be argued that there is at least one other Freshman in her own conference that was more impactful on her teams' success.

What does being a freshman have to do with it?

“it could be argued that there is at least one other Freshman in her own conference that was more impactful on her teams' success.”

It could be argued by who? You?

Anyone who knows the game. obviously you weren't watching

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

What is so “interesting”? Why identify one particular player? Why do people always say “many other deserving players “ ?

Because she is the only freshman and it could be argued that there is at least one other Freshman in her own conference that was more impactful on her teams' success.

And if she had been invited to try out, then she may have made the team...unfortunately she wasn't invited to try out

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

What is so “interesting”? Why identify one particular player? Why do people always say “many other deserving players “ ?

Because there are always deserving players left off any all star team. Not looking to knock this particular player because she is an incredible talent , but this team is supposed to be comprised of the best players in the world and based upon performance of some other players her selection over them is interesting.

What performance?

BTW, do you have any idea what the coaches are looking for?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

Congratulations to all the women who earned a spot.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Clemson is adding women's lacrosse in the 2022-23 season! Great for the sport and over the next few years-other southern schools are going to also be adding women's lacrosse. All those young lacrosse girls are going to have some fabulous opportunities!
https://www.thestate.com/sports/college/acc/clemson-university/article251998933.html

Great News! Great School, great athletic program, great academic support for athletes, great athletic facilities, great support for their athletic programs etc...

Be very thankful, Lacrosse provides more opportunity for our daughters than any other sport.

Great opportunity for a Coach as well.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Spallina to Cuse Womans Lax? would be a home-run hire.

I think it will be a woman and Syracuse Alumni.

yes!

Congratulations !!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Spallina to Cuse Womans Lax? would be a home-run hire.

I think it will be a woman and Syracuse Alumni.

yes!

Congratulations !!!

Kayla Treanor was the right choice!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Spallina to Cuse Womans Lax? would be a home-run hire.

I think it will be a woman and Syracuse Alumni.

yes!

Congratulations !!!

Kayla Treanor was the right choice!!

She is perfect for the job.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

What is so “interesting”? Why identify one particular player? Why do people always say “many other deserving players “ ?

Because there are always deserving players left off any all star team. Not looking to knock this particular player because she is an incredible talent , but this team is supposed to be comprised of the best players in the world and based upon performance of some other players her selection over them is interesting.

Her selection is 100% interestingly correct. She is a hugely impactful freshman who starred on a national championship team. She played alongside the Tewaaraton winner and managed to not only contribute but shine.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Will Joe Spallina go to Syracuse!?

Just read an article that said SU offered job to SU Alum / BC Assistant Coach but she turned it down... anything is possible but there are some additional SU Alumni that are probably being considered. IMHO JS would be a great hire.

A program like Syracuse, in my opinion, will hire a proven head coach, I doubt that whom ever they hire that this will be their first HC job.
Albany HC was star at SU
Wagner HC was star at SU
Pat Mcabe was a star at SU coached Adelphi womens to several Nat Championships

So, SU hired a first time HC. Don’t doubt Kayla Treanor. Perfect choice.

Originally Posted by The Hop

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

What is so “interesting”? Why identify one particular player? Why do people always say “many other deserving players “ ?

Because there are always deserving players left off any all star team. Not looking to knock this particular player because she is an incredible talent , but this team is supposed to be comprised of the best players in the world and based upon performance of some other players her selection over them is interesting.

Her selection is 100% interestingly correct. She is a hugely impactful freshman who starred on a national championship team. She played alongside the Tewaaraton winner and managed to not only contribute but shine.

Yes she shined but so did other freshmen! She wasn’t the only one who had an immediate impact on their team. I was surprised there were any freshman invited, including the one that got an invite before she stepped foot on a college field. Guess we’ll see what happens in the next round, good luck to all the players!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

Such a transparent attempt to knock a player. Sad. I guess some of us don’t have to wait for St Paddy’s Day to wear Green. Such an ugly color.

Not many middies more deserving. Are there a few -perhaps. Age should not matter - kid was voted First Team All ACC by her coaches, AA by US and Inside Lacrosse, won a National Championship and broke BC rookie scoring record. What more does a kid have to do. There were about 30 middies invited to try out. Not surprised she earned a spot.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Not many middies more deserving. Are there a few -perhaps. Age should not matter - kid was voted First Team All ACC by her coaches, AA by US and Inside Lacrosse, won a National Championship and broke BC rookie scoring record. What more does a kid have to do. There were about 30 middies invited to try out. Not surprised she earned a spot.

Ditto that seriously the kid can friggin play.

Any speculation on who is up for the Clemson job?

JS will campaign hard for it like he did for the Syracuse job only to tell his team he didn’t want it and would never leave SBU ( bc he can’t)

Yes he tried hard for the Cuse job only to tell his Team he would never leave them

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

Such a transparent attempt to knock a player. Sad. I guess some of us don’t have to wait for St Paddy’s Day to wear Green. Such an ugly color.

Jealous daddy with a dense butt post. The BC kid can play and yours can not

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Interesting to see the invite list for Team USA training camp included freshmen from BC. So many other deserving players left off.

Such a transparent attempt to knock a player. Sad. I guess some of us don’t have to wait for St Paddy’s Day to wear Green. Such an ugly color.

Jealous daddy with a dense butt post. The BC kid can play and yours can not

Pro league launched this weekend and to no surprise the quality of play is awesome Did not look well attended and there is the problem no crowds will put this league the same place the others are. People have to get out and support it

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Pro league launched this weekend and to no surprise the quality of play is awesome Did not look well attended and there is the problem no crowds will put this league the same place the others are. People have to get out and support it

I thought I heard an announcer say the only fans allowed are friends and family. I thought the games were fun to watch and would consider attending in person if I was in the area.

I like the Pro league, great play. But from a rule enforcement perspective. Cross checks everywhere, dangerous follow throughs, warden off everywhere. I like 60 second shot clock better than 90.

What they don’t realize is the future young kids watch this and try to do the same thing with the rules. Maybe this a good thing.

BUMPITY-BUMP

Alicon Kwolek of Richmond named as Clemson first
Coach!
What do you think the culture will be?

Great opportunity!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

BUMPITY-BUMP

Alicon Kwolek of Richmond named as Clemson first
Coach!
What do you think the culture will be?

More Importantly, when does the recruiting start.. I know a few 2022's that would travel to SC

Originally Posted by Anonymous

BUMPITY-BUMP

Alicon Kwolek of Richmond named as Clemson first
Coach!
What do you think the culture will be?

More Importantly, when does the recruiting start.. I know a few 2022's that would travel to SC

I would imagine she will start right away.... Wonder if any of her players will look to follow her?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

BUMPITY-BUMP

Alicon Kwolek of Richmond named as Clemson first
Coach!
What do you think the culture will be?

More Importantly, when does the recruiting start.. I know a few 2022's that would travel to SC

I would imagine she will start right away.... Wonder if any of her players will look to follow her?

Clemson will in my humble opinion will be a top 20 team in 5 years if Coach hits the portal hard for some veteran leadership. Have two daughters currently playing on mid/top level D1 teams. Both daughters have said there’s a buzz around Clemson being the spot to spend your Covid/Grad year.

Why do the Big Ten schools keep loosing their best players to ACC. Dirks to UNC and Cordingly to MD. Surprised someone would trade a Hopkins degree for MD?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why do the Big Ten schools keep loosing their best players to ACC. Dirks to UNC and Cordingly to MD. Surprised someone would trade a Hopkins degree for MD?

Maryland is a Big 10 school.

Kids / Players transfer all of the time for a lot of different reasons.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why do the Big Ten schools keep loosing their best players to ACC. Dirks to UNC and Cordingly to MD. Surprised someone would trade a Hopkins degree for MD?

Press release says Cordingly earned a degree at Hopkins, will be a grad student at MD.

Richmond coach is decent instructor but weak people skills.

So watching AU game Wood v Read. Final minute of first half. Two major calls that would have not been correct if not for instant replay. First Dangerous foul throw that would have been a card, and second last second goal that after review was not allowed.

Women’s College lacrosse needs instant replays. Make the quarters 14 minutes and add it. Only major college sport without it. But now we have 4 quarters. Great update(joke).

Originally Posted by Anonymous

BUMPITY-BUMP

Alicon Kwolek of Richmond named as Clemson first
Coach!
What do you think the culture will be?

More Importantly, when does the recruiting start.. I know a few 2022's that would travel to SC

I would imagine she will start right away.... Wonder if any of her players will look to follow her?

Clemson will in my humble opinion will be a top 20 team in 5 years if Coach hits the portal hard for some veteran leadership. Have two daughters currently playing on mid/top level D1 teams. Both daughters have said there’s a buzz around Clemson being the spot to spend your Covid/Grad year.

Tgey will be top 20 school instantly

Originally Posted by Anonymous

BUMPITY-BUMP

Alicon Kwolek of Richmond named as Clemson first
Coach!
What do you think the culture will be?

More Importantly, when does the recruiting start.. I know a few 2022's that would travel to SC

I would imagine she will start right away.... Wonder if any of her players will look to follow her?

Clemson will in my humble opinion will be a top 20 team in 5 years if Coach hits the portal hard for some veteran leadership. Have two daughters currently playing on mid/top level D1 teams. Both daughters have said there’s a buzz around Clemson being the spot to spend your Covid/Grad year.

Tgey will be top 20 school instantly

Maybe, maybe not…. Maybe if they bring in a bunch of transfers from Top 10 - 20 programs, otherwise not sure there is enough talent out there. There are some very good schools that have had women’s lacrosse for quite some time and they are not a Top 20 program.

I’d be shocked if Clemson was in top 20 in the next 5.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I’d be shocked if Clemson was in top 20 in the next 5.

Completely agree. Unless a superstar player wants to take advantage of their 5th year and transfer, it will take more than 5 years to build this program. Too many top players anymore now that lacrosse has grown so much throughout the country. Talent is being spread far and wide - amongst more than the top 20 teams and amongst all divisions. No longer will a few teams control all the talent. The reason you are already seeing more parity amongst the top 20. It will only get even more diluted in the next 5 years.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I’d be shocked if Clemson was in top 20 in the next 5.

Completely agree. Unless a superstar player wants to take advantage of their 5th year and transfer, it will take more than 5 years to build this program. Too many top players anymore now that lacrosse has grown so much throughout the country. Talent is being spread far and wide - amongst more than the top 20 teams and amongst all divisions. No longer will a few teams control all the talent. The reason you are already seeing more parity amongst the top 20. It will only get even more diluted in the next 5 years.

Tell us where the parity is?

The top programs consistently bring in the best players and now with the portal and the extra year of eligibility we have seen high end players transfer
Into the top programs. Sure you have some programs that crack the top 20 from time to time but there are really only about 15 programs that are in the top 20 every year and an even smaller number that are ever in the top 10.

Clemson will become a competitive program quicker than most and they have a shot at a Top 20 finish within 5 years.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I like the Pro league, great play. But from a rule enforcement perspective. Cross checks everywhere, dangerous follow throughs, warden off everywhere. I like 60 second shot clock better than 90.

What they don’t realize is the future young kids watch this and try to do the same thing with the rules. Maybe this a good thing.

The pro league is constantly showing highlights of which many of them are dangerous shots . It looks crazy .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I like the Pro league, great play. But from a rule enforcement perspective. Cross checks everywhere, dangerous follow throughs, warden off everywhere. I like 60 second shot clock better than 90.

What they don’t realize is the future young kids watch this and try to do the same thing with the rules. Maybe this a good thing.

The pro league is constantly showing highlights of which many of them are dangerous shots . It looks crazy .

Stop with the dangerous shots. Bunch of wusses

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I’d be shocked if Clemson was in top 20 in the next 5.

Completely agree. Unless a superstar player wants to take advantage of their 5th year and transfer, it will take more than 5 years to build this program. Too many top players anymore now that lacrosse has grown so much throughout the country. Talent is being spread far and wide - amongst more than the top 20 teams and amongst all divisions. No longer will a few teams control all the talent. The reason you are already seeing more parity amongst the top 20. It will only get even more diluted in the next 5 years.

Tell us where the parity is?

The top programs consistently bring in the best players and now with the portal and the extra year of eligibility we have seen high end players transfer
Into the top programs. Sure you have some programs that crack the top 20 from time to time but there are really only about 15 programs that are in the top 20 every year and an even smaller number that are ever in the top 10.

Clemson will become a competitive program quicker than most and they have a shot at a Top 20 finish within 5 years.

Disagree Clemson will be a top 20 team instantly

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I’d be shocked if Clemson was in top 20 in the next 5.

Completely agree. Unless a superstar player wants to take advantage of their 5th year and transfer, it will take more than 5 years to build this program. Too many top players anymore now that lacrosse has grown so much throughout the country. Talent is being spread far and wide - amongst more than the top 20 teams and amongst all divisions. No longer will a few teams control all the talent. The reason you are already seeing more parity amongst the top 20. It will only get even more diluted in the next 5 years.

Tell us where the parity is?

The top programs consistently bring in the best players and now with the portal and the extra year of eligibility we have seen high end players transfer
Into the top programs. Sure you have some programs that crack the top 20 from time to time but there are really only about 15 programs that are in the top 20 every year and an even smaller number that are ever in the top 10.

Clemson will become a competitive program quicker than most and they have a shot at a Top 20 finish within 5 years.

Disagree Clemson will be a top 20 team instantly

Really, do you honestly believe that Clemson will finish their first season ranked in the Top 20? Wow, why do you believe that? How will they do it?

I disagree. Will be years before they get to that level. Look at Pitt so far. Will be interesting to see how they do their first season but I believe Pitt has a much better chance than Clemson does at reaching Top 20.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I disagree. Will be years before they get to that level. Look at Pitt so far. Will be interesting to see how they do their first season but I believe Pitt has a much better chance than Clemson does at reaching Top 20.

Not sure how fast either team will finish a season ranked in the Top 20. It's not that easy, I realize that the sport is growing but there is still a limited amount of top tier talent and the vast majority of that talent will most likely continue to go to the top programs.

There are a lot of great schools that have had women's lacrosse for a long time that have not been able to crack the Top 20 consistently. Just look at the programs that you must compete against in order to get the top talent / recruits:

North Carolina
Maryland
Boston College
Syracuse
Northwestern
Virginia
Princeton
Penn
Florida
Notre Dame
Penn State
JMU
Duke

Stony Brook - mostly for the Long Island kids.

Michigan - has been improving as well and has a lot to offer student athletes.

Throw in - USC and Stanford for players looking to go to school on the west coast.

For the most part the top HS players will receive offers from and be able to find their home at one of the schools listed above.

As stated above, there are a lot of great schools out there that have had women's lacrosse for a many years but they have not been able to bring in the same level of talent as the schools listed above.

You can have a great coach at a great school but at the end of the day you need to have the athletes/players in order to compete with the best programs. As someone once said, "It's not the X's and O's, it's the Jimmys and Joes” or in this case the "Izzy's and the Charlotte's".

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I disagree. Will be years before they get to that level. Look at Pitt so far. Will be interesting to see how they do their first season but I believe Pitt has a much better chance than Clemson does at reaching Top 20.

Agreed

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why do the Big Ten schools keep loosing their best players to ACC. Dirks to UNC and Cordingly to MD. Surprised someone would trade a Hopkins degree for MD?

I think it’s ridiculous how many transfers UMD takes . Does she not believe in the recruits she brought in? The 2019s were number one recruiting class and these past two years the program has underperformed . Almost as if she doesn’t want to really coach just bring them in game ready and coached by someone else … feel sorry for the 21s and 22s going there.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why do the Big Ten schools keep loosing their best players to ACC. Dirks to UNC and Cordingly to MD. Surprised someone would trade a Hopkins degree for MD?

I think it’s ridiculous how many transfers UMD takes . Does she not believe in the recruits she brought in? The 2019s were number one recruiting class and these past two years the program has underperformed . Almost as if she doesn’t want to really coach just bring them in game ready and coached by someone else … feel sorry for the 21s and 22s going there.

Oh please, all coaches want the best players that they can get. No coach will win without depth of talent. You sound like the type of parent that would complain when a coach brings in a stud who plays the same position as your daughter in the next recruiting class.

With the exception of some of the Ivy’s (because of university policy) name one coach that will not bring in a transfer that they believe will help their team win.

BC would not have won the National Championship without their transfers.

The coaches job is to win, recruiting is part of their job, be it through transfers or HS recruits.

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

Pot meet kettle…

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

So one ignorant Clemson student allows you to paint entire region with the same brush? I see.

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

So one ignorant Clemson student allows you to paint entire region with the same brush? I see.

Seems to be way more than one student!? That region is a mess right now , due to some “ignorance” by at least 1/2 the adult population. I would be thinking twice about sending my kid to college there right now. Smart individuals should be able to follow Science and not politics or religion. I would rather be sending my kid to a Northeast school

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

So one ignorant Clemson student allows you to paint entire region with the same brush? I see.

Seems to be way more than one student!? That region is a mess right now , due to some “ignorance” by at least 1/2 the adult population. I would be thinking twice about sending my kid to college there right now. Smart individuals should be able to follow Science and not politics or religion. I would rather be sending my kid to a Northeast school

Ha. Talk about ignorant. Geez. I guess you are in favor of some lefty Ivy League school. Oh yea…. Put your mask on when you are driving😷

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

So one ignorant Clemson student allows you to paint entire region with the same brush? I see.

Seems to be way more than one student!? That region is a mess right now , due to some “ignorance” by at least 1/2 the adult population. I would be thinking twice about sending my kid to college there right now. Smart individuals should be able to follow Science and not politics or religion. I would rather be sending my kid to a Northeast school

Ha. Talk about ignorant. Geez. I guess you are in favor of some lefty Ivy League school. Oh yea…. Put your mask on when you are driving😷

It’s not just the Ivy’ that lean left, every school in the Northeast… (as well as most places) pushes the nonsense. We only hear about Ivy’s or other well known schools I.e. Penn State receiving a lot of attention due to some insane professor, and crazy WOKE administration policies.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

So one ignorant Clemson student allows you to paint entire region with the same brush? I see.

Seems to be way more than one student!? That region is a mess right now , due to some “ignorance” by at least 1/2 the adult population. I would be thinking twice about sending my kid to college there right now. Smart individuals should be able to follow Science and not politics or religion. I would rather be sending my kid to a Northeast school

What science would that be exactly?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

So one ignorant Clemson student allows you to paint entire region with the same brush? I see.

Seems to be way more than one student!? That region is a mess right now , due to some “ignorance” by at least 1/2 the adult population. I would be thinking twice about sending my kid to college there right now. Smart individuals should be able to follow Science and not politics or religion. I would rather be sending my kid to a Northeast school

Ha. Talk about ignorant. Geez. I guess you are in favor of some lefty Ivy League school. Oh yea…. Put your mask on when you are driving😷

It’s not just the Ivy’ that lean left, every school in the Northeast… (as well as most places) pushes the nonsense. We only hear about Ivy’s or other well known schools I.e. Penn State receiving a lot of attention due to some insane professor, and crazy WOKE administration policies.

Ha! If I'm ever on an operating table, I hope the Doc has a degree from A lefty Ivy School!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

So one ignorant Clemson student allows you to paint entire region with the same brush? I see.

Seems to be way more than one student!? That region is a mess right now , due to some “ignorance” by at least 1/2 the adult population. I would be thinking twice about sending my kid to college there right now. Smart individuals should be able to follow Science and not politics or religion. I would rather be sending my kid to a Northeast school

Ha. Talk about ignorant. Geez. I guess you are in favor of some lefty Ivy League school. Oh yea…. Put your mask on when you are driving😷

Ha! Nope, just in favor of sending my kid to a place where there seems to be more intelligent thinking! Places that believe in evolution and science. Just look at the Covid map infection rate and that will speak volumes

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

So one ignorant Clemson student allows you to paint entire region with the same brush? I see.

Seems to be way more than one student!? That region is a mess right now , due to some “ignorance” by at least 1/2 the adult population. I would be thinking twice about sending my kid to college there right now. Smart individuals should be able to follow Science and not politics or religion. I would rather be sending my kid to a Northeast school

As someone who lives in that "region", we'd be just fine if you want to stay in the Northeast.

Do any of you actually have a student at Clemson? I'm from LI and have a senior at Clemson. His experience has been fantastic both academically and socially. My husband and I have met many of his friends and found them to be polite and intelligent. My son has in no way experienced what you describe.

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

So one ignorant Clemson student allows you to paint entire region with the same brush? I see.

Seems to be way more than one student!? That region is a mess right now , due to some “ignorance” by at least 1/2 the adult population. I would be thinking twice about sending my kid to college there right now. Smart individuals should be able to follow Science and not politics or religion. I would rather be sending my kid to a Northeast school

As someone who lives in that "region", we'd be just fine if you want to stay in the Northeast.

GLADLY and I most definitely will! You can stay “living” (hopefully) in that region and take your chances with the stupidity people are showing there with this virus. Good luck with that “herd immunity” theory. This virus has been a huge magnifier on stupidity and people are dying over it. Not fair to your doctors and nurses and your health care system. Just hoping your children don’t suffer for the stupidity of the adults

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

So one ignorant Clemson student allows you to paint entire region with the same brush? I see.

Seems to be way more than one student!? That region is a mess right now , due to some “ignorance” by at least 1/2 the adult population. I would be thinking twice about sending my kid to college there right now. Smart individuals should be able to follow Science and not politics or religion. I would rather be sending my kid to a Northeast school

Ha. Talk about ignorant. Geez. I guess you are in favor of some lefty Ivy League school. Oh yea…. Put your mask on when you are driving😷

Ha! Nope, just in favor of sending my kid to a place where there seems to be more intelligent thinking! Places that believe in evolution and science. Just look at the Covid map infection rate and that will speak volumes

Baaa baa baaa 🐑 🐑 🐑

As usual, those that believe that they are more intelligent, sophisticated and enlightened than the rest of us are actually the most intolerant and bigoted of all.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

So one ignorant Clemson student allows you to paint entire region with the same brush? I see.

Seems to be way more than one student!? That region is a mess right now , due to some “ignorance” by at least 1/2 the adult population. I would be thinking twice about sending my kid to college there right now. Smart individuals should be able to follow Science and not politics or religion. I would rather be sending my kid to a Northeast school

What science would that be exactly?

Yeah, nobody should hold their breath waiting for an answer.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by cltlax

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Had a family friend tell me a story about their kids at Clemson.
Their kid was asked if they were “Italian or not” and when pressed about their religion the Clemson kids asked about being Catholic, -“Does that mean you’re a Christian?
Some backwards thinking down there in those parts.

So one ignorant Clemson student allows you to paint entire region with the same brush? I see.

Seems to be way more than one student!? That region is a mess right now , due to some “ignorance” by at least 1/2 the adult population. I would be thinking twice about sending my kid to college there right now. Smart individuals should be able to follow Science and not politics or religion. I would rather be sending my kid to a Northeast school

Ha. Talk about ignorant. Geez. I guess you are in favor of some lefty Ivy League school. Oh yea…. Put your mask on when you are driving😷

Ha! Nope, just in favor of sending my kid to a place where there seems to be more intelligent thinking! Places that believe in evolution and science. Just look at the Covid map infection rate and that will speak volumes

Baaa baa baaa 🐑 🐑 🐑

Enjoy the herd! 🐄🐄🐄

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Seems to be way more than one student!? That region is a mess right now , due to some “ignorance” by at least 1/2 the adult population. I would be thinking twice about sending my kid to college there right now. Smart individuals should be able to follow Science and not politics or religion. I would rather be sending my kid to a Northeast school

Ha. Talk about ignorant. Geez. I guess you are in favor of some lefty Ivy League school. Oh yea…. Put your mask on when you are driving😷[/quote]

Ha! Nope, just in favor of sending my kid to a place where there seems to be more intelligent thinking! Places that believe in evolution and science. Just look at the Covid map infection rate and that will speak volumes[/quote]

Baaa baa baaa 🐑 🐑 🐑[/quote]

Enjoy the herd! 🐄🐄🐄[/quote]

its just a matter of time before we all get it.. vaccine or not. you're better off dropping 15-20 pounds and lowering your blood pressure than relying on big pharma to bale you out.

So, I guess you don’t rely on medicine and science for anything? Do you get your other vaccines? That stuff won’t necessarily kill you either! You can just take your chances. Good luck in the herd. Only problem is, you are a spreader and I’m sure you are anti -mask as well!? You Keep on spreading your love to the herd. Best of Luck with that.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Seems to be way more than one student!? That region is a mess right now , due to some “ignorance” by at least 1/2 the adult population. I would be thinking twice about sending my kid to college there right now. Smart individuals should be able to follow Science and not politics or religion. I would rather be sending my kid to a Northeast school

Ha. Talk about ignorant. Geez. I guess you are in favor of some lefty Ivy League school. Oh yea…. Put your mask on when you are driving😷

Ha! Nope, just in favor of sending my kid to a place where there seems to be more intelligent thinking! Places that believe in evolution and science. Just look at the Covid map infection rate and that will speak volumes[/quote]

Baaa baa baaa 🐑 🐑 🐑[/quote]

Enjoy the herd! 🐄🐄🐄[/quote]

its just a matter of time before we all get it.. vaccine or not. you're better off dropping 15-20 pounds and lowering your blood pressure than relying on big pharma to bale you out.[/quote]

Yeah, because everyone who has died from Covid was fat with high blood pressure? Shows your ignorance once again! Maybe they just died from heart attacks and we are being told it’s Covid? All 4.3 million of them!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, I guess you don’t rely on medicine and science for anything? Do you get your other vaccines? That stuff won’t necessarily kill you either! You can just take your chances. Good luck in the herd. Only problem is, you are a spreader and I’m sure you are anti -mask as well!? You Keep on spreading your love to the herd. Best of Luck with that.

Are you aware that vaccinated people are getting it? So, vaccinated people are spreaders as well...what does that science tell you?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, I guess you don’t rely on medicine and science for anything? Do you get your other vaccines? That stuff won’t necessarily kill you either! You can just take your chances. Good luck in the herd. Only problem is, you are a spreader and I’m sure you are anti -mask as well!? You Keep on spreading your love to the herd. Best of Luck with that.

Are you aware that vaccinated people are getting it? So, vaccinated people are spreaders as well...what does that science tell you?

Yes, but Vaccinated people are not taking up beds in hospitals! 99% of the Covid cases serious enough to be in a hospital right now are of unvaccinated people. I seriously don’t blame some of the Drs. And Nurses in those highly unvaccinated areas for quitting! They are fed up

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, I guess you don’t rely on medicine and science for anything? Do you get your other vaccines? That stuff won’t necessarily kill you either! You can just take your chances. Good luck in the herd. Only problem is, you are a spreader and I’m sure you are anti -mask as well!? You Keep on spreading your love to the herd. Best of Luck with that.

Are you aware that vaccinated people are getting it? So, vaccinated people are spreaders as well...what does that science tell you?

It tells you, because half of the population is not getting vaccinated it’s going to keep going round and round! But, you can see the people getting seriously sick now are the unvaccinated! Tells me, the vaccine is saving lives in the vaccinated population. Thanks to Science

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, I guess you don’t rely on medicine and science for anything? Do you get your other vaccines? That stuff won’t necessarily kill you either! You can just take your chances. Good luck in the herd. Only problem is, you are a spreader and I’m sure you are anti -mask as well!? You Keep on spreading your love to the herd. Best of Luck with that.

Are you aware that vaccinated people are getting it? So, vaccinated people are spreaders as well...what does that science tell you?

Yes, but Vaccinated people are not taking up beds in hospitals! 99% of the Covid cases serious enough to be in a hospital right now are of unvaccinated people. I seriously don’t blame some of the Drs. And Nurses in those highly unvaccinated areas for quitting! They are fed up

I suggest you change the channel once in awhile,

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, I guess you don’t rely on medicine and science for anything? Do you get your other vaccines? That stuff won’t necessarily kill you either! You can just take your chances. Good luck in the herd. Only problem is, you are a spreader and I’m sure you are anti -mask as well!? You Keep on spreading your love to the herd. Best of Luck with that.

Are you aware that vaccinated people are getting it? So, vaccinated people are spreaders as well...what does that science tell you?

It tells you, because half of the population is not getting vaccinated it’s going to keep going round and round! But, you can see the people getting seriously sick now are the unvaccinated! Tells me, the vaccine is saving lives in the vaccinated population. Thanks to Science

whos telling you half the population? the numbers are up 75 -80% with at least 1 dose.. the CNN is telling you those who are seriously sick are un vaccinated, the reality might be different. Lets hope the largest medical experiment in human history continues to be successful.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

its just a matter of time before we all get it.. vaccine or not. you're better off dropping 15-20 pounds and lowering your blood pressure than relying on big pharma to bale you out.

Yeah, because everyone who has died from Covid was fat with high blood pressure? Shows your ignorance once again! Maybe they just died from heart attacks and we are being told it’s Covid? All 4.3 million of them![/quote]

You're going to get it..so is your spose and all of your kids and every one you know... put down the big-gulp and take a walk.. take some agency over your own life and stop relying on drugs.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

its just a matter of time before we all get it.. vaccine or not. you're better off dropping 15-20 pounds and lowering your blood pressure than relying on big pharma to bale you out.

Yeah, because everyone who has died from Covid was fat with high blood pressure? Shows your ignorance once again! Maybe they just died from heart attacks and we are being told it’s Covid? All 4.3 million of them!

You're going to get it..so is your spose and all of your kids and every one you know... put down the big-gulp and take a walk.. take some agency over your own life and stop relying on drugs.[/quote]

Put down the “Qoolaid”! Think for yourself and take some responsibility for yourself and others. Think for yourself, big pharma doesn’t want to put a micro chip inside of you ! You need to change the channel.

Sooooo. If the masks work why not just give them to the prisoners. Instead they set them free. Better yet. Covid gets out of a level 4 containment lab. But……. A Chinese paper mask is gonna make a difference. Wake up people. You wanna wear Chinese paper on your face go ahead. It prevents nothing. But don’t tell me what to do.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

big pharma doesn’t want to put a micro chip inside of you

Maybe so, but for sure they want to keep the cash rolling in… 9 new big pharma Billionaires just this year….

Follow the money…

Originally Posted by Anonymous

big pharma doesn’t want to put a micro chip inside of you

Maybe so, but for sure they want to keep the cash rolling in… 9 new big pharma Billionaires just this year….

Follow the money…

Follow the virus …. 4.3 million dead humans by covid! You don’t need to follow it, … it will find you. Just keep waiting , it won’t be long.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Sooooo. If the masks work why not just give them to the prisoners. Instead they set them free. Better yet. Covid gets out of a level 4 containment lab. But……. A Chinese paper mask is gonna make a difference. Wake up people. You wanna wear Chinese paper on your face go ahead. It prevents nothing. But don’t tell me what to do.

Gulp, gulp … what flavor “Qoolaid” you drinking today? Denial? You need to wake up

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Sooooo. If the masks work why not just give them to the prisoners. Instead they set them free. Better yet. Covid gets out of a level 4 containment lab. But……. A Chinese paper mask is gonna make a difference. Wake up people. You wanna wear Chinese paper on your face go ahead. It prevents nothing. But don’t tell me what to do.

Gulp, gulp … what flavor “Qoolaid” you drinking today? Denial? You need to wake up

Don’t understand your response. The above are facts. Do you really think we got a bat virus from a pangolin. Wake up. I respect you wearing your Chinese paper mask that is unable to filter the virus. Do what makes you feel safe. In return respect my obtaining the facts and basing my response to the facts. You are a lamb.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Sooooo. If the masks work why not just give them to the prisoners. Instead they set them free. Better yet. Covid gets out of a level 4 containment lab. But……. A Chinese paper mask is gonna make a difference. Wake up people. You wanna wear Chinese paper on your face go ahead. It prevents nothing. But don’t tell me what to do.

Gulp, gulp … what flavor “Qoolaid” you drinking today? Denial? You need to wake up

Don’t understand your response. The above are facts. Do you really think we got a bat virus from a pangolin. Wake up. I respect you wearing your Chinese paper mask that is unable to filter the virus. Do what makes you feel safe. In return respect my obtaining the facts and basing my response to the facts. You are a lamb.

The fact is, it doesn’t matter where the virus came from at this point! It’s a deadly virus that can kill you and it’s here and everywhere! And, your actions by not taking protective ones, can kill other human beings as well. So, you are a selfish DAF. Facts are facts! People are dying, unless you believe that is “fake news”. Drink up, and keep believing your facts

Athlete unlimited and the rules are a joke to the game. KW gets blasted in the face with a shot. What a joke the rules committee in the women’s has become. So instant replay in AU but not in college? Instant replay needs to be on college as it in every other college sport. The priority is to get it right.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Sooooo. If the masks work why not just give them to the prisoners. Instead they set them free. Better yet. Covid gets out of a level 4 containment lab. But……. A Chinese paper mask is gonna make a difference. Wake up people. You wanna wear Chinese paper on your face go ahead. It prevents nothing. But don’t tell me what to do.

Gulp, gulp … what flavor “Qoolaid” you drinking today? Denial? You need to wake up

Don’t understand your response. The above are facts. Do you really think we got a bat virus from a pangolin. Wake up. I respect you wearing your Chinese paper mask that is unable to filter the virus. Do what makes you feel safe. In return respect my obtaining the facts and basing my response to the facts. You are a lamb.

The fact is, it doesn’t matter where the virus came from at this point! It’s a deadly virus that can kill you and it’s here and everywhere! And, your actions by not taking protective ones, can kill other human beings as well. So, you are a selfish DAF. Facts are facts! People are dying, unless you believe that is “fake news”. Drink up, and keep believing your facts

Ok. Please provide the virus rates and the overall death rates.
Compare the death rate with flu/pneumonia death rates.
Provide the current flu/pneumonia death rate….hint can’t find it cause everyone now dies of covid.
Finally…. Not my responsibility to protect you. You protect you. I will protect myself.
Only lambs depend on others to protect them. You are a lamb

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Sooooo. If the masks work why not just give them to the prisoners. Instead they set them free. Better yet. Covid gets out of a level 4 containment lab. But……. A Chinese paper mask is gonna make a difference. Wake up people. You wanna wear Chinese paper on your face go ahead. It prevents nothing. But don’t tell me what to do.

Gulp, gulp … what flavor “Qoolaid” you drinking today? Denial? You need to wake up

Don’t understand your response. The above are facts. Do you really think we got a bat virus from a pangolin. Wake up. I respect you wearing your Chinese paper mask that is unable to filter the virus. Do what makes you feel safe. In return respect my obtaining the facts and basing my response to the facts. You are a lamb.

The fact is, it doesn’t matter where the virus came from at this point! It’s a deadly virus that can kill you and it’s here and everywhere! And, your actions by not taking protective ones, can kill other human beings as well. So, you are a selfish DAF. Facts are facts! People are dying, unless you believe that is “fake news”. Drink up, and keep believing your facts

Ok. Please provide the virus rates and the overall death rates.
Compare the death rate with flu/pneumonia death rates.
Provide the current flu/pneumonia death rate….hint can’t find it cause everyone now dies of covid.
Finally…. Not my responsibility to protect you. You protect you. I will protect myself.
Only lambs depend on others to protect them. You are a lamb

WOW! You are in so deep in denial , there is no helping you! You keep protecting yourself. Good luck ! BTW, we are all in this fight together against this virus. But, you just keep worrying about yourself! That’s what’s wrong with humanity ! You are a Selfish FOOL

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Athlete unlimited and the rules are a joke to the game. KW gets blasted in the face with a shot. What a joke the rules committee in the women’s has become. So instant replay in AU but not in college? Instant replay needs to be on college as it in every other college sport. The priority is to get it right.

YAY for instant replay! I also think it Def. needs to be in college as it is with the other sports! Cameras don’t lie, forget the rules committee! Let’s get it right!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Sooooo. If the masks work why not just give them to the prisoners. Instead they set them free. Better yet. Covid gets out of a level 4 containment lab. But……. A Chinese paper mask is gonna make a difference. Wake up people. You wanna wear Chinese paper on your face go ahead. It prevents nothing. But don’t tell me what to do.

Gulp, gulp … what flavor “Qoolaid” you drinking today? Denial? You need to wake up

Don’t understand your response. The above are facts. Do you really think we got a bat virus from a pangolin. Wake up. I respect you wearing your Chinese paper mask that is unable to filter the virus. Do what makes you feel safe. In return respect my obtaining the facts and basing my response to the facts. You are a lamb.

The fact is, it doesn’t matter where the virus came from at this point! It’s a deadly virus that can kill you and it’s here and everywhere! And, your actions by not taking protective ones, can kill other human beings as well. So, you are a selfish DAF. Facts are facts! People are dying, unless you believe that is “fake news”. Drink up, and keep believing your facts

Ok. Please provide the virus rates and the overall death rates.
Compare the death rate with flu/pneumonia death rates.
Provide the current flu/pneumonia death rate….hint can’t find it cause everyone now dies of covid.
Finally…. Not my responsibility to protect you. You protect you. I will protect myself.
Only lambs depend on others to protect them. You are a lamb

WOW! You are in so deep in denial , there is no helping you! You keep protecting yourself. Good luck ! BTW, we are all in this fight together against this virus. But, you just keep worrying about yourself! That’s what’s wrong with humanity ! You are a Selfish FOOL

I notice that you didn’t provide any of the information the poster ask about.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Sooooo. If the masks work why not just give them to the prisoners. Instead they set them free. Better yet. Covid gets out of a level 4 containment lab. But……. A Chinese paper mask is gonna make a difference. Wake up people. You wanna wear Chinese paper on your face go ahead. It prevents nothing. But don’t tell me what to do.

Gulp, gulp … what flavor “Qoolaid” you drinking today? Denial? You need to wake up

Don’t understand your response. The above are facts. Do you really think we got a bat virus from a pangolin. Wake up. I respect you wearing your Chinese paper mask that is unable to filter the virus. Do what makes you feel safe. In return respect my obtaining the facts and basing my response to the facts. You are a lamb.

The fact is, it doesn’t matter where the virus came from at this point! It’s a deadly virus that can kill you and it’s here and everywhere! And, your actions by not taking protective ones, can kill other human beings as well. So, you are a selfish DAF. Facts are facts! People are dying, unless you believe that is “fake news”. Drink up, and keep believing your facts

Ok. Please provide the virus rates and the overall death rates.
Compare the death rate with flu/pneumonia death rates.
Provide the current flu/pneumonia death rate….hint can’t find it cause everyone now dies of covid.
Finally…. Not my responsibility to protect you. You protect you. I will protect myself.
Only lambs depend on others to protect them. You are a lamb

Still waiting on facts lefty.
Put your Chinese paper mask on and follow the nonsense politicians are telling you.

Have your daughter get her vax, put on her mask, and head back to campus. Otherwise she can stay home and listen to your rant that is getting you nowhere. Rules is rules.

It wouldn’t matter if you did provide statistics and data to these people. They’d immediately cry “FAKE NEWS BY THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA!!” It’s such a tired act. Their views are formed by listening to the right wing media that does nothing more than spew detest and divisiveness, offering no policy plans whatsoever. Fortunately their numbers are dwindling as the rates rise in the number of people getting vaccinated continue to rise.

Maybe RIGHTY should pick up the phone and talk to some of his Florida friends! See if they still drinking the Qoolaid there, or are they secretly getting vaccinated ? Hmmm , I bet More of their “friends” are prob. Vaccinated then they realize. Self preservation reasons only

Turning this back to lacrosse, I’m sure there are more than a few anti-vax parents who thought they could easily beat the system by getting a fake vaccination record for their daughters before heading back to school. While the cards make look valid, all the university has to do is verify the information against the database to determine if it’s legitimate. I’m not sure what the penalties would be, but it’s not beyond the possibility of a scholarship being revoked.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Turning this back to lacrosse, I’m sure there are more than a few anti-vax parents who thought they could easily beat the system by getting a fake vaccination record for their daughters before heading back to school. While the cards make look valid, all the university has to do is verify the information against the database to determine if it’s legitimate. I’m not sure what the penalties would be, but it’s not beyond the possibility of a scholarship being revoked.

Show me your papers…..

Or “bring me your equipment, your off the team for putting your teammates at risk and jeopardizing our season”

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Or “bring me your equipment, your off the team for putting your teammates at risk and jeopardizing our season”

It has been proven true that vaccinated individuals can be infected with COVID as well as "shed" / transmit the virus, why are you so concerned with others getting the vaccine ? Apparently, you have been vaccinated and can still put yourself and others at risk so why do you feel the need to tell others what to do? The Team is no safer from you or your daughter than from those who are not vaccinated.

Where your mask, schedule your booster shot and and keep telling yourself that you know what is best for the rest of us.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Turning this back to lacrosse, I’m sure there are more than a few anti-vax parents who thought they could easily beat the system by getting a fake vaccination record for their daughters before heading back to school. While the cards make look valid, all the university has to do is verify the information against the database to determine if it’s legitimate. I’m not sure what the penalties would be, but it’s not beyond the possibility of a scholarship being revoked.

Show me your papers…..

Have you not had to show vaccination records for your kids all these years for them to go to school? Most schools and camps for that matter, require this for as long as I can remember! Is that against your rights or your children’s rights? Do you home school? I
If so, keep home schooling. There are some online colleges you can have your child do. Good luck

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Turning this back to lacrosse, I’m sure there are more than a few anti-vax parents who thought they could easily beat the system by getting a fake vaccination record for their daughters before heading back to school. While the cards make look valid, all the university has to do is verify the information against the database to determine if it’s legitimate. I’m not sure what the penalties would be, but it’s not beyond the possibility of a scholarship being revoked.

Show me your papers…..

Have you not had to show vaccination records for your kids all these years for them to go to school? Most schools and camps for that matter, require this for as long as I can remember! Is that against your rights or your children’s rights? Do you home school? I
If so, keep home schooling. There are some online colleges you can have your child do. Good luck

Can you be infected with Covid if you have been vaccinated?

Can you or your daughter infect others if you have been vaccinated?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Or “bring me your equipment, your off the team for putting your teammates at risk and jeopardizing our season”

Typical, intolerant know it all who believes only their opinion matters, is divisive and likes to control and bully others.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Have your daughter get her vax, put on her mask, and head back to campus. Otherwise she can stay home and listen to your rant that is getting you nowhere. Rules is rules.

Baa Baaa Baaa

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Turning this back to lacrosse, I’m sure there are more than a few anti-vax parents who thought they could easily beat the system by getting a fake vaccination record for their daughters before heading back to school. While the cards make look valid, all the university has to do is verify the information against the database to determine if it’s legitimate. I’m not sure what the penalties would be, but it’s not beyond the possibility of a scholarship being revoked.

Show me your papers…..

Have you not had to show vaccination records for your kids all these years for them to go to school? Most schools and camps for that matter, require this for as long as I can remember! Is that against your rights or your children’s rights? Do you home school? I
If so, keep home schooling. There are some online colleges you can have your child do. Good luck

Can you be infected with Covid if you have been vaccinated?

Can you or your daughter infect others if you have been vaccinated?

Yes, you can still be infected. Good thing is, it prob. Won’t mean death due to being vaccinated. Thanks to the vaccination! We can stop the wide spread if more people get vaccinated. The vaccination will stop people from going into hospitals with serious illnesses. 98% of people in hospitals right now in deathly situations are unvaccinated individuals!

And yes, vaccinated people can infect others as well. However, if that person getting infected is vaccinated, it will most likely not be a serious matter! So whether you are the one giving or getting Covid… the key is vaccinations will keep Covid from being a killer, for the most part! Unfortunately, 4.3 million humans are dead from Covid and that’s a tragedy! We now have a vaccine that can save people’s lives. If people don’t get the vaccine and end up dead, when they had an opportunity to get the vaccine… that’s just DAF

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Turning this back to lacrosse, I’m sure there are more than a few anti-vax parents who thought they could easily beat the system by getting a fake vaccination record for their daughters before heading back to school. While the cards make look valid, all the university has to do is verify the information against the database to determine if it’s legitimate. I’m not sure what the penalties would be, but it’s not beyond the possibility of a scholarship being revoked.

Show me your papers…..

Have you not had to show vaccination records for your kids all these years for them to go to school? Most schools and camps for that matter, require this for as long as I can remember! Is that against your rights or your children’s rights? Do you home school? I
If so, keep home schooling. There are some online colleges you can have your child do. Good luck

Can you be infected with Covid if you have been vaccinated?

Can you or your daughter infect others if you have been vaccinated?

Yes, you can still be infected. Good thing is, it prob. Won’t mean death due to being vaccinated. Thanks to the vaccination! We can stop the wide spread if more people get vaccinated. The vaccination will stop people from going into hospitals with serious illnesses. 98% of people in hospitals right now in deathly situations are unvaccinated individuals!

And yes, vaccinated people can infect others as well. However, if that person getting infected is vaccinated, it will most likely not be a serious matter! So whether you are the one giving or getting Covid… the key is vaccinations will keep Covid from being a killer, for the most part! Unfortunately, 4.3 million humans are dead from Covid and that’s a tragedy! We now have a vaccine that can save people’s lives. If people don’t get the vaccine and end up dead, when they had an opportunity to get the vaccine… that’s just DAF

Really, and where are you getting your information?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Turning this back to lacrosse, I’m sure there are more than a few anti-vax parents who thought they could easily beat the system by getting a fake vaccination record for their daughters before heading back to school. While the cards make look valid, all the university has to do is verify the information against the database to determine if it’s legitimate. I’m not sure what the penalties would be, but it’s not beyond the possibility of a scholarship being revoked.

Show me your papers…..

Have you not had to show vaccination records for your kids all these years for them to go to school? Most schools and camps for that matter, require this for as long as I can remember! Is that against your rights or your children’s rights? Do you home school? I
If so, keep home schooling. There are some online colleges you can have your child do. Good luck

Can you be infected with Covid if you have been vaccinated?

Can you or your daughter infect others if you have been vaccinated?

Yes, you can still be infected. Good thing is, it prob. Won’t mean death due to being vaccinated. Thanks to the vaccination! We can stop the wide spread if more people get vaccinated. The vaccination will stop people from going into hospitals with serious illnesses. 98% of people in hospitals right now in deathly situations are unvaccinated individuals!

And yes, vaccinated people can infect others as well. However, if that person getting infected is vaccinated, it will most likely not be a serious matter! So whether you are the one giving or getting Covid… the key is vaccinations will keep Covid from being a killer, for the most part! Unfortunately, 4.3 million humans are dead from Covid and that’s a tragedy! We now have a vaccine that can save people’s lives. If people don’t get the vaccine and end up dead, when they had an opportunity to get the vaccine… that’s just DAF

We can stop the spread?

How many times will the goalpost be moved?

When will you be up for your first booster shot?

Vaccine will receive FDA approval today, so you can stop with that excuse. Get your vaccine and stop complaining. You sound foolish with all your conspiracy theories. The vaccine protects against serious illness and is required to participate in many privileges. Like attending college. If your so scared, then stay home. Just don’t put others at risk. Sick of listening to your selfishness

Facebook science-take a look at the countries with high vaccination rates and see who is dying -vaccinated higher rate sorry. Continue to live in the herd -it is easier.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Vaccine will receive FDA approval today, so you can stop with that excuse. Get your vaccine and stop complaining. You sound foolish with all your conspiracy theories. The vaccine protects against serious illness and is required to participate in many privileges. Like attending college. If your so scared, then stay home. Just don’t put others at risk. Sick of listening to your selfishness

The "FDA" .... is that the same government agency that allows for the manufacturing, distribution and sale of cigarets/tobacco?

Who is making excuses? Who is complaining? Who said anything about a conspiracy?

You are the one who sounds scared so maybe you should stay home.

Please explain how people are being selfish?

The vaccine does not protect against contracting Covid, nor does the vaccine stop infected individuals from spreading covid.

Your statement "Sick of listening to your selfishness" tells us that you are intolerant of opinions that differ from your own.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Vaccine will receive FDA approval today, so you can stop with that excuse. Get your vaccine and stop complaining. You sound foolish with all your conspiracy theories. The vaccine protects against serious illness and is required to participate in many privileges. Like attending college. If your so scared, then stay home. Just don’t put others at risk. Sick of listening to your selfishness

The "FDA" .... is that the same government agency that allows for the manufacturing, distribution and sale of cigarets/tobacco?

Who is making excuses? Who is complaining? Who said anything about a conspiracy?

You are the one who sounds scared so maybe you should stay home.

Please explain how people are being selfish?

The vaccine does not protect against contracting Covid, nor does the vaccine stop infected individuals from spreading covid.

Your statement "Sick of listening to your selfishness" tells us that you are intolerant of opinions that differ from your own.

More like intolerant of ignorant people like you. Stop being part of the problem. You sound foolish. And please keep yourself and your unvaccinated kids away from me and mine. Luckily the vaccine is required at my kids school to protect her from people like you!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Vaccine will receive FDA approval today, so you can stop with that excuse. Get your vaccine and stop complaining. You sound foolish with all your conspiracy theories. The vaccine protects against serious illness and is required to participate in many privileges. Like attending college. If your so scared, then stay home. Just don’t put others at risk. Sick of listening to your selfishness

The "FDA" .... is that the same government agency that allows for the manufacturing, distribution and sale of cigarets/tobacco?

Who is making excuses? Who is complaining? Who said anything about a conspiracy?

You are the one who sounds scared so maybe you should stay home.

Please explain how people are being selfish?

The vaccine does not protect against contracting Covid, nor does the vaccine stop infected individuals from spreading covid.

Your statement "Sick of listening to your selfishness" tells us that you are intolerant of opinions that differ from your own.

More like intolerant of ignorant people like you. Stop being part of the problem. You sound foolish. And please keep yourself and your unvaccinated kids away from me and mine. Luckily the vaccine is required at my kids school to protect her from people like you!

You do realize that you have been responding to multiple people.

As usual, people like you resort to name calling instead of answering questions.

Please tell us that you know that the vaccine does not prevent you or your children from contacting COVID.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Vaccine will receive FDA approval today, so you can stop with that excuse. Get your vaccine and stop complaining. You sound foolish with all your conspiracy theories. The vaccine protects against serious illness and is required to participate in many privileges. Like attending college. If your so scared, then stay home. Just don’t put others at risk. Sick of listening to your selfishness

The "FDA" .... is that the same government agency that allows for the manufacturing, distribution and sale of cigarets/tobacco?

Who is making excuses? Who is complaining? Who said anything about a conspiracy?

You are the one who sounds scared so maybe you should stay home.

Please explain how people are being selfish?

The vaccine does not protect against contracting Covid, nor does the vaccine stop infected individuals from spreading covid.

Your statement "Sick of listening to your selfishness" tells us that you are intolerant of opinions that differ from your own.

More like intolerant of ignorant people like you. Stop being part of the problem. You sound foolish. And please keep yourself and your unvaccinated kids away from me and mine. Luckily the vaccine is required at my kids school to protect her from people like you!

There you go again.... "ignorant people like you".

Please tell us where you get your information. Please tell us why you believe the information to be accurate, factual and or truthful. Please tell us one single thing that has been put out by our government, the WHO, big tech, big pharma or the media (print, social, broadcast etc...) that has been accurate, factual or true since this whole all started. Please tell us how you verify what you believe is true. Please tell us why or how any of the lockdown mandates or restrictions have been rational, logical or made any sense at all. Please tell us how science was used to make any of the draconian decisions. Please tell us why people who have been vaccinated are being infected with Covid. Please tell us why people who have been vaccinated are spreading Covid. Please tell us why people who have been vaccinated or as they once said "fully vaccinated" need an additional "booster shot". Please tell us when those who have been vaccinated will not have to get additional "booster" shots. Please tell us how you can know that there are no long term adverse affects of getting vaccinated?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Vaccine will receive FDA approval today, so you can stop with that excuse. Get your vaccine and stop complaining. You sound foolish with all your conspiracy theories. The vaccine protects against serious illness and is required to participate in many privileges. Like attending college. If your so scared, then stay home. Just don’t put others at risk. Sick of listening to your selfishness

The "FDA" .... is that the same government agency that allows for the manufacturing, distribution and sale of cigarets/tobacco?

Who is making excuses? Who is complaining? Who said anything about a conspiracy?

You are the one who sounds scared so maybe you should stay home.

Please explain how people are being selfish?

The vaccine does not protect against contracting Covid, nor does the vaccine stop infected individuals from spreading covid.

Your statement "Sick of listening to your selfishness" tells us that you are intolerant of opinions that differ from your own.

More like intolerant of ignorant people like you. Stop being part of the problem. You sound foolish. And please keep yourself and your unvaccinated kids away from me and mine. Luckily the vaccine is required at my kids school to protect her from people like you!

Just so we are clear, you are aware that the vaccine does not stop you from getting or transmitting Covid.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Vaccine will receive FDA approval today, so you can stop with that excuse. Get your vaccine and stop complaining. You sound foolish with all your conspiracy theories. The vaccine protects against serious illness and is required to participate in many privileges. Like attending college. If your so scared, then stay home. Just don’t put others at risk. Sick of listening to your selfishness

The "FDA" .... is that the same government agency that allows for the manufacturing, distribution and sale of cigarets/tobacco?

Who is making excuses? Who is complaining? Who said anything about a conspiracy?

You are the one who sounds scared so maybe you should stay home.

Please explain how people are being selfish?

The vaccine does not protect against contracting Covid, nor does the vaccine stop infected individuals from spreading covid.

Your statement "Sick of listening to your selfishness" tells us that you are intolerant of opinions that differ from your own.

More like intolerant of ignorant people like you. Stop being part of the problem. You sound foolish. And please keep yourself and your unvaccinated kids away from me and mine. Luckily the vaccine is required at my kids school to protect her from people like you!

Talk about sounding foolish, how will you protect yourself from having the virus transmitted to you from vaccinated individuals?

Calling someone selfish because they question the vaccine is right out of the intolerant socialist playbook!!!
The poster is 100% correct in that it does not prevent the spread. It is a personal choice to take it or not. Also, it’s quite selfish to require any populous to mass vaccinate for a virus with an over 99% survival rate. If your afraid then YOU should stay home instead of locking down the whole dang country. If you follow the science (remember this was the lefts catch phrase until the science contradicted their mandates) it’s clear this all has been an experiment to control the people.
Now take your selfish, name calling, bullying tookus home so you don’t get sick and the rest of us will go to concerts, ball games and back to school!!!!!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Vaccine will receive FDA approval today, so you can stop with that excuse. Get your vaccine and stop complaining. You sound foolish with all your conspiracy theories. The vaccine protects against serious illness and is required to participate in many privileges. Like attending college. If your so scared, then stay home. Just don’t put others at risk. Sick of listening to your selfishness

The "FDA" .... is that the same government agency that allows for the manufacturing, distribution and sale of cigarets/tobacco?

Who is making excuses? Who is complaining? Who said anything about a conspiracy?

You are the one who sounds scared so maybe you should stay home.

Please explain how people are being selfish?

The vaccine does not protect against contracting Covid, nor does the vaccine stop infected individuals from spreading covid.

Your statement "Sick of listening to your selfishness" tells us that you are intolerant of opinions that differ from your own.

More like intolerant of ignorant people like you. Stop being part of the problem. You sound foolish. And please keep yourself and your unvaccinated kids away from me and mine. Luckily the vaccine is required at my kids school to protect her from people like you!

There you go again.... "ignorant people like you".

Please tell us where you get your information. Please tell us why you believe the information to be accurate, factual and or truthful. Please tell us one single thing that has been put out by our government, the WHO, big tech, big pharma or the media (print, social, broadcast etc...) that has been accurate, factual or true since this whole all started. Please tell us how you verify what you believe is true. Please tell us why or how any of the lockdown mandates or restrictions have been rational, logical or made any sense at all. Please tell us how science was used to make any of the draconian decisions. Please tell us why people who have been vaccinated are being infected with Covid. Please tell us why people who have been vaccinated are spreading Covid. Please tell us why people who have been vaccinated or as they once said "fully vaccinated" need an additional "booster shot". Please tell us when those who have been vaccinated will not have to get additional "booster" shots. Please tell us how you can know that there are no long term adverse affects of getting vaccinated?

Well said. This poster can’t answer your questions and will call names like a child.

Originally Posted by The Hop

Calling someone selfish because they question the vaccine is right out of the intolerant socialist playbook!!!
The poster is 100% correct in that it does not prevent the spread. It is a personal choice to take it or not. Also, it’s quite selfish to require any populous to mass vaccinate for a virus with an over 99% survival rate. If your afraid then YOU should stay home instead of locking down the whole dang country. If you follow the science (remember this was the lefts catch phrase until the science contradicted their mandates) it’s clear this all has been an experiment to control the people.
Now take your selfish, name calling, bullying tookus home so you don’t get sick and the rest of us will go to concerts, ball games and back to school!!!!!!

What she/he said! I think you just dropped the mic!

Originally Posted by The Hop

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Vaccine will receive FDA approval today, so you can stop with that excuse. Get your vaccine and stop complaining. You sound foolish with all your conspiracy theories. The vaccine protects against serious illness and is required to participate in many privileges. Like attending college. If your so scared, then stay home. Just don’t put others at risk. Sick of listening to your selfishness

The "FDA" .... is that the same government agency that allows for the manufacturing, distribution and sale of cigarets/tobacco?

Who is making excuses? Who is complaining? Who said anything about a conspiracy?

You are the one who sounds scared so maybe you should stay home.

Please explain how people are being selfish?

The vaccine does not protect against contracting Covid, nor does the vaccine stop infected individuals from spreading covid.

Your statement "Sick of listening to your selfishness" tells us that you are intolerant of opinions that differ from your own.

More like intolerant of ignorant people like you. Stop being part of the problem. You sound foolish. And please keep yourself and your unvaccinated kids away from me and mine. Luckily the vaccine is required at my kids school to protect her from people like you!

There you go again.... "ignorant people like you".

Please tell us where you get your information. Please tell us why you believe the information to be accurate, factual and or truthful. Please tell us one single thing that has been put out by our government, the WHO, big tech, big pharma or the media (print, social, broadcast etc...) that has been accurate, factual or true since this whole all started. Please tell us how you verify what you believe is true. Please tell us why or how any of the lockdown mandates or restrictions have been rational, logical or made any sense at all. Please tell us how science was used to make any of the draconian decisions. Please tell us why people who have been vaccinated are being infected with Covid. Please tell us why people who have been vaccinated are spreading Covid. Please tell us why people who have been vaccinated or as they once said "fully vaccinated" need an additional "booster shot". Please tell us when those who have been vaccinated will not have to get additional "booster" shots. Please tell us how you can know that there are no long term adverse affects of getting vaccinated?

Well said. This poster can’t answer your questions and will call names like a child.

Ummm , really! If the ignorant hat fits… wear it! Keep drinking your Qoolaid

Can we get back to lax now!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Originally Posted by The Hop

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Vaccine will receive FDA approval today, so you can stop with that excuse. Get your vaccine and stop complaining. You sound foolish with all your conspiracy theories. The vaccine protects against serious illness and is required to participate in many privileges. Like attending college. If your so scared, then stay home. Just don’t put others at risk. Sick of listening to your selfishness

The "FDA" .... is that the same government agency that allows for the manufacturing, distribution and sale of cigarets/tobacco?

Who is making excuses? Who is complaining? Who said anything about a conspiracy?

You are the one who sounds scared so maybe you should stay home.

Please explain how people are being selfish?

The vaccine does not protect against contracting Covid, nor does the vaccine stop infected individuals from spreading covid.

Your statement "Sick of listening to your selfishness" tells us that you are intolerant of opinions that differ from your own.

More like intolerant of ignorant people like you. Stop being part of the problem. You sound foolish. And please keep yourself and your unvaccinated kids away from me and mine. Luckily the vaccine is required at my kids school to protect her from people like you!

There you go again.... "ignorant people like you".

Please tell us where you get your information. Please tell us why you believe the information to be accurate, factual and or truthful. Please tell us one single thing that has been put out by our government, the WHO, big tech, big pharma or the media (print, social, broadcast etc...) that has been accurate, factual or true since this whole all started. Please tell us how you verify what you believe is true. Please tell us why or how any of the lockdown mandates or restrictions have been rational, logical or made any sense at all. Please tell us how science was used to make any of the draconian decisions. Please tell us why people who have been vaccinated are being infected with Covid. Please tell us why people who have been vaccinated are spreading Covid. Please tell us why people who have been vaccinated or as they once said "fully vaccinated" need an additional "booster shot". Please tell us when those who have been vaccinated will not have to get additional "booster" shots. Please tell us how you can know that there are no long term adverse affects of getting vaccinated?

Well said. This poster can’t answer your questions and will call names like a child.

Ummm , really! If the ignorant hat fits… wear it! Keep drinking your Qoolaid

One again, no answers to reasonable questions.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Can we get back to lax now!

Not until you put your mask on, get in your Prius, drive to the vaccination station, get vaccinated and post it on Facebook….

September 1…. Which programs will land the best 23’s? Will College coaches commit fewer than normal players because they want to see who enters the Transfer Portal at the end of the 2022 season?

My daughter definitely heard from fewer programs than we were expecting, but we knew she would not be one of the first players to go. Makes it much easier to dismiss the dozens of prospect day invites! What a complete racket! So glad we didn’t book a bunch of travel around those. I did sign her up for one, but it’s local so no real loss, she will end up getting some reps in.

Colleges are picking girls for a few spots immediately.
The rest of the spots they will take the entire year or more to fill.
There is still time!
Princeton just added a 22 the other day.

Army just went from a good coaching staff to one , if not the best staff in the country. I thought Dowd was done coaching when she left UNC????

What women’s program will be most helped by their ‘21 class? I think Stanford and then possibly Hopkins 2nd. My daughter does not go to either school.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What women’s program will be most helped by their ‘21 class? I think Stanford and then possibly Hopkins 2nd. My daughter does not go to either school.

UNC, MD and NW for sure! Definitely not Stanford or Hopkins

Originally Posted by Anonymous

September 1…. Which programs will land the best 23’s? Will College coaches commit fewer than normal players because they want to see who enters the Transfer Portal at the end of the 2022 season?

BC
NW
MD
UNC
Princeton
Penn

All these programs will commit 6-8 of the top '23 girls. After that:

Stanford
Duke
Virginia
Syracuse
Hopkins
PSU
Yale
Florida
USC

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What women’s program will be most helped by their ‘21 class? I think Stanford and then possibly Hopkins 2nd. My daughter does not go to either school.

Stanford and Hopkins are both excellent programs with plenty of talent... I don't see any freshmen making that big of a difference in the overall standing of the team.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

September 1…. Which programs will land the best 23’s? Will College coaches commit fewer than normal players because they want to see who enters the Transfer Portal at the end of the 2022 season?

BC
NW
MD
UNC
Princeton
Penn

All these programs will commit 6-8 of the top '23 girls. After that:

Stanford
Duke
Virginia
Syracuse
Hopkins
PSU
Yale
Florida
USC

Reminds me of that game/song…. “Which one of these things doesn’t belong here “.

Yale not really at the same level as the programs listed.

Also, I think you have to somewhat define “Top 23 Girls”, IMHO most would consider UA / Top 50 or so players as Top Tier and few if any programs get 6-8 of them.

I do agree however that the majority of top 23’s will end up at the schools listed (just not sure Yale will get many )

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What women’s program will be most helped by their ‘21 class? I think Stanford and then possibly Hopkins 2nd. My daughter does not go to either school.

Stanford and Hopkins are both excellent programs with plenty of talent... I don't see any freshmen making that big of a difference in the overall standing of the team.

Stanford and Hopkins are top 15-20 programs neither of whom will ever make a final 4

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What women’s program will be most helped by their ‘21 class? I think Stanford and then possibly Hopkins 2nd. My daughter does not go to either school.

Stanford and Hopkins are both excellent programs with plenty of talent... I don't see any freshmen making that big of a difference in the overall standing of the team.

Stanford and Hopkins are top 15-20 programs neither of whom will ever make a final 4

What is your point?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What women’s program will be most helped by their ‘21 class? I think Stanford and then possibly Hopkins 2nd. My daughter does not go to either school.

Stanford and Hopkins are both excellent programs with plenty of talent... I don't see any freshmen making that big of a difference in the overall standing of the team.

Stanford and Hopkins are top 15-20 programs neither of whom will ever make a final 4

It is rare that any freshmen will help any Top Tier program enough to dramatically change the program much from where that program would be without the freshmen class. The best programs, Top 10 - 15 always have talent and in most cases at the top programs we will only see a 2 or 3 freshmen getting meaningful playing time in the competitive games. I guess if one of the less competitive programs were able to bring in a strong freshmen class that class would have a major impact on the teams performance. The problem is that programs outside the traditional top programs have a hard time bringing in deeply talented freshmen classes.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What women’s program will be most helped by their ‘21 class? I think Stanford and then possibly Hopkins 2nd. My daughter does not go to either school.

Stanford and Hopkins are both excellent programs with plenty of talent... I don't see any freshmen making that big of a difference in the overall standing of the team.

Stanford and Hopkins are top 15-20 programs neither of whom will ever make a final 4

What is your point?

Top players don’t/won’t go there.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What women’s program will be most helped by their ‘21 class? I think Stanford and then possibly Hopkins 2nd. My daughter does not go to either school.

Stanford and Hopkins are both excellent programs with plenty of talent... I don't see any freshmen making that big of a difference in the overall standing of the team.

Stanford and Hopkins are top 15-20 programs neither of whom will ever make a final 4

What is your point?

Top players don’t/won’t go there.

True. Even the Stanford commit, who was touted as “best on LI” was actually out played by several ‘23s. The best 2021s went to BC, and UNC. West coast is a lax wasteland, but good for academics

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What women’s program will be most helped by their ‘21 class? I think Stanford and then possibly Hopkins 2nd. My daughter does not go to either school.

Stanford and Hopkins are both excellent programs with plenty of talent... I don't see any freshmen making that big of a difference in the overall standing of the team.

Stanford and Hopkins are top 15-20 programs neither of whom will ever make a final 4

What is your point?

Top players don’t/won’t go there.

True. Even the Stanford commit, who was touted as “best on LI” was actually out played by several ‘23s. The best 2021s went to BC, and UNC. West coast is a lax wasteland, but good for academics

Stanford 2020 class ranked 2nd in the country last year by IL and 2021s will be top 5 this year. 3 of the top 2020s redshirted so the redshirt/freshman class is loaded. Your myopic view of LI as the only source of talent is unfortunate, Stanford 2021 talent comes from there and other locations. You can ask all the teams their 21/22 commits beat at HHH and Lake Placid including BC and Northwestern. Stanford about to be perennial top 10.

Lol, wishful thinking dad. Until you get blown out be BC and get a reality check. Fact is, the best girls don’t want to go that far when they can have the same thing back East, and their families can get to their games without extensive expenses and travel time.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Lol, wishful thinking dad. Until you get blown out be BC and get a reality check. Fact is, the best girls don’t want to go that far when they can have the same thing back East, and their families can get to their games without extensive expenses and travel time.

^ Back to back top 5 classes so clearly somebody “wants to go that far”. Also, the highest ranked school academically with D1 scholarship money. I would send a kid there in a second just for the jobs the kids get on the back end. The Ivies, Stanford, N Western, JHU, Duke and then a big gap to everyone else.

Agree, Stanford is going nowhere....but UP! Top recruiting classes and a great coach, they will be in the top 10 conversation from here forward. It's great if you want to go to college solely for lacrosse - stay on the east coast and go to some of the recognized lacrosse names like SYR, MD, BC - but a lot of families would jump at the chance for a high academic and lacrosse experience.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Lol, wishful thinking dad. Until you get blown out be BC and get a reality check. Fact is, the best girls don’t want to go that far when they can have the same thing back East, and their families can get to their games without extensive expenses and travel time.

LOL, Fact is , most girls couldn’t get offers from Stanford! Congrats to anyone who does, Major accomplishment. Some girls do lacrosse, in hopes that doors get opened to great schools and great opportunities they may not get otherwise. Girls that are actually thinking about their futures, and not just about playing college lacrosse in driving distance to home. It’s not about the family getting to college lacrosse games.

Stanford acceptance rate 4.7%, BC acceptance rate 32.3%.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Lol, wishful thinking dad. Until you get blown out be BC and get a reality check. Fact is, the best girls don’t want to go that far when they can have the same thing back East, and their families can get to their games without extensive expenses and travel time.

^ Back to back top 5 classes so clearly somebody “wants to go that far”. Also, the highest ranked school academically with D1 scholarship money. I would send a kid there in a second just for the jobs the kids get on the back end. The Ivies, Stanford, N Western, JHU, Duke and then a big gap to everyone else.

Well said and exactly correct. Stanford and JHU are Top 10 academic schools and both have very good lacrosse programs that obviously attract some top tier talent. Will either win a National Championship? Who knows, I’m sure none of the chest pounding geniuses on here thought JMU would win a National Championship. I would consider both to be two of the 20 best programs. If a player has an opportunity to attend one of these schools and doesn’t at least consider it that would be foolish.
Trying to knock or tear down either of these Universities or their Lacrosse Programs make you look ignorant.
I would add Notre Dame to your list above. Lacrosse provides so many opportunities for young women the goal should be to find the best fit. If you are looking for excellent academics as well as a Top 10-20 caliber lacrosse program I would say Stanford and Hopkins along with Princeton, Duke, Penn, Northwestern, Notre Dame would all fit the bill.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Lol, wishful thinking dad. Until you get blown out be BC and get a reality check. Fact is, the best girls don’t want to go that far when they can have the same thing back East, and their families can get to their games without extensive expenses and travel time.

LOL, Fact is , most girls couldn’t get offers from Stanford! Congrats to anyone who does, Major accomplishment. Some girls do lacrosse, in hopes that doors get opened to great schools and great opportunities they may not get otherwise. Girls that are actually thinking about their futures, and not just about playing college lacrosse in driving distance to home. It’s not about the family getting to college lacrosse games.

Stanford acceptance rate 4.7%, BC acceptance rate 32.3%.

I already know of several top 2023 commits that crossed Stanford off because of distance. Great school, but too far for many when there are similar options much closer. As you see the top girls begin to commit, you will see that they pick others schools, such as the top YJ player who committed to BC today and could have gone anywhere she wanted, but didn't even visit. If it was just for school, that's very different than going to play on a D1 team where you want the support of your family.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Lol, wishful thinking dad. Until you get blown out be BC and get a reality check. Fact is, the best girls don’t want to go that far when they can have the same thing back East, and their families can get to their games without extensive expenses and travel time.

LOL, Fact is , most girls couldn’t get offers from Stanford! Congrats to anyone who does, Major accomplishment. Some girls do lacrosse, in hopes that doors get opened to great schools and great opportunities they may not get otherwise. Girls that are actually thinking about their futures, and not just about playing college lacrosse in driving distance to home. It’s not about the family getting to college lacrosse games.

Stanford acceptance rate 4.7%, BC acceptance rate 32.3%.

I already know of several top 2023 commits that crossed Stanford off because of distance. Great school, but too far for many when there are similar options much closer. As you see the top girls begin to commit, you will see that they pick others schools, such as the top YJ player who committed to BC today and could have gone anywhere she wanted, but didn't even visit. If it was just for school, that's very different than going to play on a D1 team where you want the support of your family.

No one said Stanford has its pick of the elite players. The posters said no elite players go to Stanford which is just nonsense. It appears some folks just want to tear down a particularly kid/family any chance they get. Stanford will be top 10 for the next several years and offers arguably the best education available. I’ll sign-up for that all day long. Congrats to the kids wherever they sign!!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Lol, wishful thinking dad. Until you get blown out be BC and get a reality check. Fact is, the best girls don’t want to go that far when they can have the same thing back East, and their families can get to their games without extensive expenses and travel time.

LOL, Fact is , most girls couldn’t get offers from Stanford! Congrats to anyone who does, Major accomplishment. Some girls do lacrosse, in hopes that doors get opened to great schools and great opportunities they may not get otherwise. Girls that are actually thinking about their futures, and not just about playing college lacrosse in driving distance to home. It’s not about the family getting to college lacrosse games.

Stanford acceptance rate 4.7%, BC acceptance rate 32.3%.

I already know of several top 2023 commits that crossed Stanford off because of distance. Great school, but too far for many when there are similar options much closer. As you see the top girls begin to commit, you will see that they pick others schools, such as the top YJ player who committed to BC today and could have gone anywhere she wanted, but didn't even visit. If it was just for school, that's very different than going to play on a D1 team where you want the support of your family.

They may have crossed Stanford off their list, but I doubt in most cases they were even on Stanfords list ? Did they receive calls from Stanford and politely decline ?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Lol, wishful thinking dad. Until you get blown out be BC and get a reality check. Fact is, the best girls don’t want to go that far when they can have the same thing back East, and their families can get to their games without extensive expenses and travel time.

LOL, Fact is , most girls couldn’t get offers from Stanford! Congrats to anyone who does, Major accomplishment. Some girls do lacrosse, in hopes that doors get opened to great schools and great opportunities they may not get otherwise. Girls that are actually thinking about their futures, and not just about playing college lacrosse in driving distance to home. It’s not about the family getting to college lacrosse games.

Stanford acceptance rate 4.7%, BC acceptance rate 32.3%.

I already know of several top 2023 commits that crossed Stanford off because of distance. Great school, but too far for many when there are similar options much closer. As you see the top girls begin to commit, you will see that they pick others schools, such as the top YJ player who committed to BC today and could have gone anywhere she wanted, but didn't even visit. If it was just for school, that's very different than going to play on a D1 team where you want the support of your family.

They may have crossed Stanford off their list, but I doubt in most cases they were even on Stanfords list ? Did they receive calls from Stanford and politely decline ?

I think part of the problem with the recruiting at schools like Stanford, Duke and Northwestern is that they take too long with the process. For Stanford and NU, that is partly because they start late. Not sure why Duke does it. Many girls have already visited schools and have visits booked throughout the month. Those schools have not set visits up, or are just starting too. There are girls who are be recruited to those schools (calls on Sept 1) but will see other schools on their list and get offers they don’t want to turn down. Just because you visit does not always mean there is an offer right away, and as other schools move down their list, spots will be gone. There is maybe one girl that they will actually wait around for from Connecticut. It’s unfortunate that girls are pressured into committing before they see all the schools who have reached out, but I also understand from the coaches perspective. So, I don’t think the girls “decline” the offer, it’s that another offer came in first that was comparable and they didn’t want to lose it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Lol, wishful thinking dad. Until you get blown out be BC and get a reality check. Fact is, the best girls don’t want to go that far when they can have the same thing back East, and their families can get to their games without extensive expenses and travel time.

LOL, Fact is , most girls couldn’t get offers from Stanford! Congrats to anyone who does, Major accomplishment. Some girls do lacrosse, in hopes that doors get opened to great schools and great opportunities they may not get otherwise. Girls that are actually thinking about their futures, and not just about playing college lacrosse in driving distance to home. It’s not about the family getting to college lacrosse games.

Stanford acceptance rate 4.7%, BC acceptance rate 32.3%.

I already know of several top 2023 commits that crossed Stanford off because of distance. Great school, but too far for many when there are similar options much closer. As you see the top girls begin to commit, you will see that they pick others schools, such as the top YJ player who committed to BC today and could have gone anywhere she wanted, but didn't even visit. If it was just for school, that's very different than going to play on a D1 team where you want the support of your family.

They may have crossed Stanford off their list, but I doubt in most cases they were even on Stanfords list ? Did they receive calls from Stanford and politely decline ?

I think part of the problem with the recruiting at schools like Stanford, Duke and Northwestern is that they take too long with the process. For Stanford and NU, that is partly because they start late. Not sure why Duke does it. Many girls have already visited schools and have visits booked throughout the month. Those schools have not set visits up, or are just starting too. There are girls who are be recruited to those schools (calls on Sept 1) but will see other schools on their list and get offers they don’t want to turn down. Just because you visit does not always mean there is an offer right away, and as other schools move down their list, spots will be gone. There is maybe one girl that they will actually wait around for from Connecticut. It’s unfortunate that girls are pressured into committing before they see all the schools who have reached out, but I also understand from the coaches perspective. So, I don’t think the girls “decline” the offer, it’s that another offer came in first that was comparable and they didn’t want to lose it.

That is bad information you are spreading. In the new Sept 1st era that started 2 years ago, Stanford had the first commit in the nation and was the first completely done with the entire 2021 recruiting class before all other schools. Last year a bit slower. Duke definitely was not ready for the new age of recruiting and dragged their feet and lost out on a lot of perspective athletes. But they have changed and are more aggressive now. It is a completely different recruiting scene with the new 11th grade sept1 start date. The top players know every single school interest in one day. Best thing that could ever happen for the players, to have any and all options all laid out on the table at the same time.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Lol, wishful thinking dad. Until you get blown out be BC and get a reality check. Fact is, the best girls don’t want to go that far when they can have the same thing back East, and their families can get to their games without extensive expenses and travel time.

LOL, Fact is , most girls couldn’t get offers from Stanford! Congrats to anyone who does, Major accomplishment. Some girls do lacrosse, in hopes that doors get opened to great schools and great opportunities they may not get otherwise. Girls that are actually thinking about their futures, and not just about playing college lacrosse in driving distance to home. It’s not about the family getting to college lacrosse games.

Stanford acceptance rate 4.7%, BC acceptance rate 32.3%.

I already know of several top 2023 commits that crossed Stanford off because of distance. Great school, but too far for many when there are similar options much closer. As you see the top girls begin to commit, you will see that they pick others schools, such as the top YJ player who committed to BC today and could have gone anywhere she wanted, but didn't even visit. If it was just for school, that's very different than going to play on a D1 team where you want the support of your family.

They may have crossed Stanford off their list, but I doubt in most cases they were even on Stanfords list ? Did they receive calls from Stanford and politely decline ?

I think part of the problem with the recruiting at schools like Stanford, Duke and Northwestern is that they take too long with the process. For Stanford and NU, that is partly because they start late. Not sure why Duke does it. Many girls have already visited schools and have visits booked throughout the month. Those schools have not set visits up, or are just starting too. There are girls who are be recruited to those schools (calls on Sept 1) but will see other schools on their list and get offers they don’t want to turn down. Just because you visit does not always mean there is an offer right away, and as other schools move down their list, spots will be gone. There is maybe one girl that they will actually wait around for from Connecticut. It’s unfortunate that girls are pressured into committing before they see all the schools who have reached out, but I also understand from the coaches perspective. So, I don’t think the girls “decline” the offer, it’s that another offer came in first that was comparable and they didn’t want to lose it.

That is bad information you are spreading. In the new Sept 1st era that started 2 years ago, Stanford had the first commit in the nation and was the first completely done with the entire 2021 recruiting class before all other schools. Last year a bit slower. Duke definitely was not ready for the new age of recruiting and dragged their feet and lost out on a lot of perspective athletes. But they have changed and are more aggressive now. It is a completely different recruiting scene with the new 11th grade sept1 start date. The top players know every single school interest in one day. Best thing that could ever happen for the players, to have any and all options all laid out on the table at the same time.

You have no idea what you're talking about! Duke, Stanford and NU have not had any girls on campus yet, and top girls are already beginning to commit elsewhere after having officially visited. NU is finally coming around to do home visits this week. A little late! Early bird getting the worm!

'Early bird getting the worm'
No. My daughter got a lot of great calls and wants to drill down and pick the right school for her. That requires a lot of work on her part, phone calls to current players, visiting the school and finding out about the important things of each school. This isn't a game show or a relay race, it's her future so we will take as much time as the colleges will give us to make the best choice - that way she only has to do it once.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Lol, wishful thinking dad. Until you get blown out be BC and get a reality check. Fact is, the best girls don’t want to go that far when they can have the same thing back East, and their families can get to their games without extensive expenses and travel time.

LOL, Fact is , most girls couldn’t get offers from Stanford! Congrats to anyone who does, Major accomplishment. Some girls do lacrosse, in hopes that doors get opened to great schools and great opportunities they may not get otherwise. Girls that are actually thinking about their futures, and not just about playing college lacrosse in driving distance to home. It’s not about the family getting to college lacrosse games.

Stanford acceptance rate 4.7%, BC acceptance rate 32.3%.

I already know of several top 2023 commits that crossed Stanford off because of distance. Great school, but too far for many when there are similar options much closer. As you see the top girls begin to commit, you will see that they pick others schools, such as the top YJ player who committed to BC today and could have gone anywhere she wanted, but didn't even visit. If it was just for school, that's very different than going to play on a D1 team where you want the support of your family.

No one said Stanford has its pick of the elite players. The posters said no elite players go to Stanford which is just nonsense. It appears some folks just want to tear down a particularly kid/family any chance they get. Stanford will be top 10 for the next several years and offers arguably the best education available. I’ll sign-up for that all day long. Congrats to the kids wherever they sign!!!

Agree and would add that no program has their pick of the elite players..... The top 40-50 recruits usually get divided up between 10 - 15 schools with a handful choosing non traditional top 10-15 programs.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Lol, wishful thinking dad. Until you get blown out be BC and get a reality check. Fact is, the best girls don’t want to go that far when they can have the same thing back East, and their families can get to their games without extensive expenses and travel time.

LOL, Fact is , most girls couldn’t get offers from Stanford! Congrats to anyone who does, Major accomplishment. Some girls do lacrosse, in hopes that doors get opened to great schools and great opportunities they may not get otherwise. Girls that are actually thinking about their futures, and not just about playing college lacrosse in driving distance to home. It’s not about the family getting to college lacrosse games.

Stanford acceptance rate 4.7%, BC acceptance rate 32.3%.

I already know of several top 2023 commits that crossed Stanford off because of distance. Great school, but too far for many when there are similar options much closer. As you see the top girls begin to commit, you will see that they pick others schools, such as the top YJ player who committed to BC today and could have gone anywhere she wanted, but didn't even visit. If it was just for school, that's very different than going to play on a D1 team where you want the support of your family.

Are you saying that BC is a similar option to Stanford? BC is closer Maryland, Syracuse, Florida, Penn State, Rutgers etc...than it is to Stanford academically. Very few similar options to Stanford and BC is not one of them. BC very good school with an excellent lacrosse program but certainly not the end all be all. Many options out there, help your daughter find the one that is best for he. BTW, any player who receives an offer from Stanford will have many alternatives if Stanford is not for her.

Good Luck to All.

Question for those who have gone through recruiting. My daughter is scheduled to go to 3 official visits. Two of who are paying for her flight and are pretty far away. She already has a couple offers from unofficial visits, but wanted to see all the schools before she decides. My questions are: Do schools usually offer a spot at an official visit? We are also concerned that she may lose the spot offered at other schools if she waits too long. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Question for those who have gone through recruiting. My daughter is scheduled to go to 3 official visits. Two of who are paying for her flight and are pretty far away. She already has a couple offers from unofficial visits, but wanted to see all the schools before she decides. My questions are: Do schools usually offer a spot at an official visit? We are also concerned that she may lose the spot offered at other schools if she waits too long. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!

My opinion be honest with them about where are you going. It’s all a business and they ALL tell small lies. They have to sell their product

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Question for those who have gone through recruiting. My daughter is scheduled to go to 3 official visits. Two of who are paying for her flight and are pretty far away. She already has a couple offers from unofficial visits, but wanted to see all the schools before she decides. My questions are: Do schools usually offer a spot at an official visit? We are also concerned that she may lose the spot offered at other schools if she waits too long. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!

My opinion be honest with them about where are you going. It’s all a business and they ALL tell small lies. They have to sell their product

Sound advice, true and accurate.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Question for those who have gone through recruiting. My daughter is scheduled to go to 3 official visits. Two of who are paying for her flight and are pretty far away. She already has a couple offers from unofficial visits, but wanted to see all the schools before she decides. My questions are: Do schools usually offer a spot at an official visit? We are also concerned that she may lose the spot offered at other schools if she waits too long. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!

My opinion be honest with them about where are you going. It’s all a business and they ALL tell small lies. They have to sell their product

Sound advice, true and accurate.

Can Inask if your from the Northeast? Lots to think about when the school is a plane ride away. Florida Chicago California.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Question for those who have gone through recruiting. My daughter is scheduled to go to 3 official visits. Two of who are paying for her flight and are pretty far away. She already has a couple offers from unofficial visits, but wanted to see all the schools before she decides. My questions are: Do schools usually offer a spot at an official visit? We are also concerned that she may lose the spot offered at other schools if she waits too long. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!

My opinion be honest with them about where are you going. It’s all a business and they ALL tell small lies. They have to sell their product

Sound advice, true and accurate.

Can Inask if your from the Northeast? Lots to think about when the school is a plane ride away. Florida Chicago California.

Yes, from NE. Some great options within driving distance, but do want to consider some of the schools that are far away. It will be mid October before we can get everywhere she wants to see. Just not how sure how patient these coaches are.

We had a coach give a week timeline. My daughter asked for more time and was told no bc the coach was worried about the next tier starting commit if they waited. A respectable reason but the next class there weren’t as harsh timelines.
You don’t want to lose offers but there’s enough interest your daughter should be fine with a coach rescinding. However if the school you’re worried about is one of your daughters top 3, then she needs to have a good conversation with that coach.
Early recruiting had it’s flaws but not one coach pressured my kid. She was also too young to know what she wanted in 9th grade and ended up having to wait until September 1 as a 2020
IMHO if a coach really wants your daughter—they will wait.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We had a coach give a week timeline. My daughter asked for more time and was told no bc the coach was worried about the next tier starting commit if they waited. A respectable reason but the next class there weren’t as harsh timelines.
You don’t want to lose offers but there’s enough interest your daughter should be fine with a coach rescinding. However if the school you’re worried about is one of your daughters top 3, then she needs to have a good conversation with that coach.
Early recruiting had it’s flaws but not one coach pressured my kid. She was also too young to know what she wanted in 9th grade and ended up having to wait until September 1 as a 2020
IMHO if a coach really wants your daughter—they will wait.

Why would a coach wait?

Coaches want players who want to go to the school and play for them.

Unless your daughter is a real phenom there are hundreds of similar players the coach talk to.

Don’t commit to a school that you are not comfortable with but don’t expect the coach to wait around so that you can look for a better opportunity.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We had a coach give a week timeline. My daughter asked for more time and was told no bc the coach was worried about the next tier starting commit if they waited. A respectable reason but the next class there weren’t as harsh timelines.
You don’t want to lose offers but there’s enough interest your daughter should be fine with a coach rescinding. However if the school you’re worried about is one of your daughters top 3, then she needs to have a good conversation with that coach.
Early recruiting had it’s flaws but not one coach pressured my kid. She was also too young to know what she wanted in 9th grade and ended up having to wait until September 1 as a 2020
IMHO if a coach really wants your daughter—they will wait.

Why would a coach wait?

Coaches want players who want to go to the school and play for them.

Unless your daughter is a real phenom there are hundreds of similar players the coach talk to.

Don’t commit to a school that you are not comfortable with but don’t expect the coach to wait around so that you can look for a better opportunity.

I disagree. Many top rated recruits are on the radar for many of the same schools. These girls are visiting their top choices and will decide after they see 4-5 schools. The coaches know this and will wait. Why don’t you think anyone has committed to Duke, Stanford, Princeton, Penn, Syracuse, Northwestern, Maryland, etc.? We will see the majority of these girls commit late September/early October. My daughter is one of them and the schools she’s interested in have given offers but want her to see the other schools to make sure she makes the right choice.

There has been a commitment to MD…a goalie

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Question for those who have gone through recruiting. My daughter is scheduled to go to 3 official visits. Two of who are paying for her flight and are pretty far away. She already has a couple offers from unofficial visits, but wanted to see all the schools before she decides. My questions are: Do schools usually offer a spot at an official visit? We are also concerned that she may lose the spot offered at other schools if she waits too long. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!

Schools usually will make an offer on an official visit or shortly there after, assuming all goes well. Dont be to concerned with losing a spot or stringing them along, they do it all the time. If you are fair and honest and they dont want to wait then I think your getting the answer if its the right program. Best rule in recruiting is that a no is as good as a yes.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We had a coach give a week timeline. My daughter asked for more time and was told no bc the coach was worried about the next tier starting commit if they waited. A respectable reason but the next class there weren’t as harsh timelines.
You don’t want to lose offers but there’s enough interest your daughter should be fine with a coach rescinding. However if the school you’re worried about is one of your daughters top 3, then she needs to have a good conversation with that coach.
Early recruiting had it’s flaws but not one coach pressured my kid. She was also too young to know what she wanted in 9th grade and ended up having to wait until September 1 as a 2020
IMHO if a coach really wants your daughter—they will wait.

Why would a coach wait?

Coaches want players who want to go to the school and play for them.

Unless your daughter is a real phenom there are hundreds of similar players the coach talk to.

Don’t commit to a school that you are not comfortable with but don’t expect the coach to wait around so that you can look for a better opportunity.

I disagree. Many top rated recruits are on the radar for many of the same schools. These girls are visiting their top choices and will decide after they see 4-5 schools. The coaches know this and will wait. Why don’t you think anyone has committed to Duke, Stanford, Princeton, Penn, Syracuse, Northwestern, Maryland, etc.? We will see the majority of these girls commit late September/early October. My daughter is one of them and the schools she’s interested in have given offers but want her to see the other schools to make sure she makes the right choice.

Yes, top rated… that’s why I said phenom…
Every situation is different and there are only so many of those “top rated” recruits. The process really does sort it all out in terms of where players actually stack up vs other players.

I have been through this process a number of times. If you have been contacted on September 1st ( congratulations) your daughter is considered to be a top prospect. Coaches know top prospects will receive numerous offers, be honest with your timeline and visits and you will be surprised at how understanding the coaches will be. Some coaches may not make an offer until you indicate they are your top choice others will be up front and lay it all on the table ( always confused me , how can you make comparisons if the coach hasn’t indicated your financial package ) Once again congratulations and enjoy this experience with your daughter. Oh one other thing it’s really nice when you are all finished and signed. Safe travels !

Thanks for the info. My daughter landed right about where I expected, but is it really ‘top prospect’ to be approached on Sept 1? I feel like a lot of kids probably got calls. Maybe not? Ours were from programs in the 10-20 range and then lots of others beneath that but with appealing discussions regarding role and scholarship money. Anyway, mine is happy to be in the mix and looking forward to figuring out where she’ll be spending her college years.

Whats up with Stanford recruiting?? Missing out on top recruits because they drag their feat, while getting second and third tier recruits. Bad plan

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Whats up with Stanford recruiting?? Missing out on top recruits because they drag their feat, while getting second and third tier recruits. Bad plan

Where'd your daughter land?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Whats up with Stanford recruiting?? Missing out on top recruits because they drag their feat, while getting second and third tier recruits. Bad plan

Their ranking also fell by 2 in US News. Wonder why? Scandals?

So, the troll on there who keeps trying to knock Stanford - you're so relentless with your negativity it strikes me that 1 of 2 things is happening here. Either:
1) your daughter wanted to go to Stanford but didn't have the academics and got dropped (which makes sense because you can't spell or use correct grammar)
or 2) Stanford coaches ignored your kid and it's hurting your ego

I'm a HS coach (different sport) and this kind of toxic stuff is rampant among jealous parents. Believe me, it trickles down to kids' behavior as well, so do your daughter a favor and focus on something else! Stop embarassing yourself.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, the troll on there who keeps trying to knock Stanford - you're so relentless with your negativity it strikes me that 1 of 2 things is happening here. Either:
1) your daughter wanted to go to Stanford but didn't have the academics and got dropped (which makes sense because you can't spell or use correct grammar)
or 2) Stanford coaches ignored your kid and it's hurting your ego

I'm a HS coach (different sport) and this kind of toxic stuff is rampant among jealous parents. Believe me, it trickles down to kids' behavior as well, so do your daughter a favor and focus on something else! Stop embarassing yourself.

THIS^^^

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, the troll on there who keeps trying to knock Stanford - you're so relentless with your negativity it strikes me that 1 of 2 things is happening here. Either:
1) your daughter wanted to go to Stanford but didn't have the academics and got dropped (which makes sense because you can't spell or use correct grammar)
or 2) Stanford coaches ignored your kid and it's hurting your ego

I'm a HS coach (different sport) and this kind of toxic stuff is rampant among jealous parents. Believe me, it trickles down to kids' behavior as well, so do your daughter a favor and focus on something else! Stop embarassing yourself.

Lol, love when people change the subject without answering the question! Stanford is still a better academic school than most, but dropping out of the top 5 was surprising. Just as surprising as them not actively recruiting the best players if they want to improve their program. Many top players that I know cancelled their visits because they were offered elsewhere first. Poor recruiting tactics, and they're not the only school guilty.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, the troll on there who keeps trying to knock Stanford - you're so relentless with your negativity it strikes me that 1 of 2 things is happening here. Either:
1) your daughter wanted to go to Stanford but didn't have the academics and got dropped (which makes sense because you can't spell or use correct grammar)
or 2) Stanford coaches ignored your kid and it's hurting your ego

I'm a HS coach (different sport) and this kind of toxic stuff is rampant among jealous parents. Believe me, it trickles down to kids' behavior as well, so do your daughter a favor and focus on something else! Stop embarassing yourself.

Lol, love when people change the subject without answering the question! Stanford is still a better academic school than most, but dropping out of the top 5 was surprising. Just as surprising as them not actively recruiting the best players if they want to improve their program. Many top players that I know cancelled their visits because they were offered elsewhere first. Poor recruiting tactics, and they're not the only school guilty.

Maybe, just maybe, said Top Players do not have the grades or their parents do not have or want to spend the $$ flying out west to see their daughter play. Maybe the player or the parents just want to be closer to home. Who knows but please stop with trying to diminish Stanford or their Lacrosse Program, If you spouted your nonsense publicly you would be laughed out of the room. No dog in the fight but does being ranked 5 or 6 or 10 really matter that much? Stanford is an elite university with a very competitive lacrosse program, I'm sure they will not miss the players who cancelled their visits.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, the troll on there who keeps trying to knock Stanford - you're so relentless with your negativity it strikes me that 1 of 2 things is happening here. Either:
1) your daughter wanted to go to Stanford but didn't have the academics and got dropped (which makes sense because you can't spell or use correct grammar)
or 2) Stanford coaches ignored your kid and it's hurting your ego

I'm a HS coach (different sport) and this kind of toxic stuff is rampant among jealous parents. Believe me, it trickles down to kids' behavior as well, so do your daughter a favor and focus on something else! Stop embarassing yourself.

Lol, love when people change the subject without answering the question! Stanford is still a better academic school than most, but dropping out of the top 5 was surprising. Just as surprising as them not actively recruiting the best players if they want to improve their program. Many top players that I know cancelled their visits because they were offered elsewhere first. Poor recruiting tactics, and they're not the only school guilty.

Maybe, just maybe, said Top Players do not have the grades or their parents do not have or want to spend the $$ flying out west to see their daughter play. Maybe the player or the parents just want to be closer to home. Who knows but please stop with trying to diminish Stanford or their Lacrosse Program, If you spouted your nonsense publicly you would be laughed out of the room. No dog in the fight but does being ranked 5 or 6 or 10 really matter that much? Stanford is an elite university with a very competitive lacrosse program, I'm sure they will not miss the players who cancelled their visits.

Who knows why they did not get many top recruits this year as some have pointed out many top recruits are automatically a bad fit just due to academic and distance .The funny thing is if you include red shirt freshman their freshman class will be one of the top ranked in the country. The difficulty they will have is the same as USC ,lack of competition does not prepare them for a difficult NCAA tournament and the Inside lax over hyping machine will continue to try but until high school lacrosse spreads west it will be an uphill battle.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, the troll on there who keeps trying to knock Stanford - you're so relentless with your negativity it strikes me that 1 of 2 things is happening here. Either:
1) your daughter wanted to go to Stanford but didn't have the academics and got dropped (which makes sense because you can't spell or use correct grammar)
or 2) Stanford coaches ignored your kid and it's hurting your ego

I'm a HS coach (different sport) and this kind of toxic stuff is rampant among jealous parents. Believe me, it trickles down to kids' behavior as well, so do your daughter a favor and focus on something else! Stop embarassing yourself.

Lol, love when people change the subject without answering the question! Stanford is still a better academic school than most, but dropping out of the top 5 was surprising. Just as surprising as them not actively recruiting the best players if they want to improve their program. Many top players that I know cancelled their visits because they were offered elsewhere first. Poor recruiting tactics, and they're not the only school guilty.

Maybe, just maybe, said Top Players do not have the grades or their parents do not have or want to spend the $$ flying out west to see their daughter play. Maybe the player or the parents just want to be closer to home. Who knows but please stop with trying to diminish Stanford or their Lacrosse Program, If you spouted your nonsense publicly you would be laughed out of the room. No dog in the fight but does being ranked 5 or 6 or 10 really matter that much? Stanford is an elite university with a very competitive lacrosse program, I'm sure they will not miss the players who cancelled their visits.

Who knows why they did not get many top recruits this year as some have pointed out many top recruits are automatically a bad fit just due to academic and distance .The funny thing is if you include red shirt freshman their freshman class will be one of the top ranked in the country. The difficulty they will have is the same as USC ,lack of competition does not prepare them for a difficult NCAA tournament and the Inside lax over hyping machine will continue to try but until high school lacrosse spreads west it will be an uphill battle.

Considering Stanford is rated as one of the hardest university’s to get into in the US and has great lacrosse, no one should ever be diminishing it. Huge Congrats to any girl who has offers from here! Certainly cream of the crop student:/ athlete!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, the troll on there who keeps trying to knock Stanford - you're so relentless with your negativity it strikes me that 1 of 2 things is happening here. Either:
1) your daughter wanted to go to Stanford but didn't have the academics and got dropped (which makes sense because you can't spell or use correct grammar)
or 2) Stanford coaches ignored your kid and it's hurting your ego

I'm a HS coach (different sport) and this kind of toxic stuff is rampant among jealous parents. Believe me, it trickles down to kids' behavior as well, so do your daughter a favor and focus on something else! Stop embarassing yourself.

Lol, love when people change the subject without answering the question! Stanford is still a better academic school than most, but dropping out of the top 5 was surprising. Just as surprising as them not actively recruiting the best players if they want to improve their program. Many top players that I know cancelled their visits because they were offered elsewhere first. Poor recruiting tactics, and they're not the only school guilty.

Maybe, just maybe, said Top Players do not have the grades or their parents do not have or want to spend the $$ flying out west to see their daughter play. Maybe the player or the parents just want to be closer to home. Who knows but please stop with trying to diminish Stanford or their Lacrosse Program, If you spouted your nonsense publicly you would be laughed out of the room. No dog in the fight but does being ranked 5 or 6 or 10 really matter that much? Stanford is an elite university with a very competitive lacrosse program, I'm sure they will not miss the players who cancelled their visits.

Who knows why they did not get many top recruits this year as some have pointed out many top recruits are automatically a bad fit just due to academic and distance .The funny thing is if you include red shirt freshman their freshman class will be one of the top ranked in the country. The difficulty they will have is the same as USC ,lack of competition does not prepare them for a difficult NCAA tournament and the Inside lax over hyping machine will continue to try but until high school lacrosse spreads west it will be an uphill battle.

It should also be pointed out that they had one of the best recruiting classes last year... a tough act to follow for this next class. Maybe girls are looking for a better place for playing time, instead of potentially waiting 3 (or more) years.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, the troll on there who keeps trying to knock Stanford - you're so relentless with your negativity it strikes me that 1 of 2 things is happening here. Either:
1) your daughter wanted to go to Stanford but didn't have the academics and got dropped (which makes sense because you can't spell or use correct grammar)
or 2) Stanford coaches ignored your kid and it's hurting your ego

I'm a HS coach (different sport) and this kind of toxic stuff is rampant among jealous parents. Believe me, it trickles down to kids' behavior as well, so do your daughter a favor and focus on something else! Stop embarassing yourself.

Lol, love when people change the subject without answering the question! Stanford is still a better academic school than most, but dropping out of the top 5 was surprising. Just as surprising as them not actively recruiting the best players if they want to improve their program. Many top players that I know cancelled their visits because they were offered elsewhere first. Poor recruiting tactics, and they're not the only school guilty.

Maybe, just maybe, said Top Players do not have the grades or their parents do not have or want to spend the $$ flying out west to see their daughter play. Maybe the player or the parents just want to be closer to home. Who knows but please stop with trying to diminish Stanford or their Lacrosse Program, If you spouted your nonsense publicly you would be laughed out of the room. No dog in the fight but does being ranked 5 or 6 or 10 really matter that much? Stanford is an elite university with a very competitive lacrosse program, I'm sure they will not miss the players who cancelled their visits.

Who knows why they did not get many top recruits this year as some have pointed out many top recruits are automatically a bad fit just due to academic and distance .The funny thing is if you include red shirt freshman their freshman class will be one of the top ranked in the country. The difficulty they will have is the same as USC ,lack of competition does not prepare them for a difficult NCAA tournament and the Inside lax over hyping machine will continue to try but until high school lacrosse spreads west it will be an uphill battle.

Considering Stanford is rated as one of the hardest university’s to get into in the US and has great lacrosse, no one should ever be diminishing it. Huge Congrats to any girl who has offers from here! Certainly cream of the crop student:/ athlete!

Haters gonna detest.... they can't help themselves. Simply put it's a character flaw.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, the troll on there who keeps trying to knock Stanford - you're so relentless with your negativity it strikes me that 1 of 2 things is happening here. Either:
1) your daughter wanted to go to Stanford but didn't have the academics and got dropped (which makes sense because you can't spell or use correct grammar)
or 2) Stanford coaches ignored your kid and it's hurting your ego

I'm a HS coach (different sport) and this kind of toxic stuff is rampant among jealous parents. Believe me, it trickles down to kids' behavior as well, so do your daughter a favor and focus on something else! Stop embarassing yourself.

Lol, love when people change the subject without answering the question! Stanford is still a better academic school than most, but dropping out of the top 5 was surprising. Just as surprising as them not actively recruiting the best players if they want to improve their program. Many top players that I know cancelled their visits because they were offered elsewhere first. Poor recruiting tactics, and they're not the only school guilty.

Maybe, just maybe, said Top Players do not have the grades or their parents do not have or want to spend the $$ flying out west to see their daughter play. Maybe the player or the parents just want to be closer to home. Who knows but please stop with trying to diminish Stanford or their Lacrosse Program, If you spouted your nonsense publicly you would be laughed out of the room. No dog in the fight but does being ranked 5 or 6 or 10 really matter that much? Stanford is an elite university with a very competitive lacrosse program, I'm sure they will not miss the players who cancelled their visits.

Who knows why they did not get many top recruits this year as some have pointed out many top recruits are automatically a bad fit just due to academic and distance .The funny thing is if you include red shirt freshman their freshman class will be one of the top ranked in the country. The difficulty they will have is the same as USC ,lack of competition does not prepare them for a difficult NCAA tournament and the Inside lax over hyping machine will continue to try but until high school lacrosse spreads west it will be an uphill battle.

Considering Stanford is rated as one of the hardest university’s to get into in the US and has great lacrosse, no one should ever be diminishing it. Huge Congrats to any girl who has offers from here! Certainly cream of the crop student:/ athlete!

Agree that it is an elite school, but they do not get the "cream of the crop" The best girls in the grade have already, or about to commit elsewhere. They did not even accept official visit invites. Not sure why, probably because it's too far.

To the Stanford haters, do you realize how foolish you sound? Stanford is a great school with a very good lacrosse program why do you feel the need to knock the school or the program? I will not hold my breath waiting for the answer.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, the troll on there who keeps trying to knock Stanford - you're so relentless with your negativity it strikes me that 1 of 2 things is happening here. Either:
1) your daughter wanted to go to Stanford but didn't have the academics and got dropped (which makes sense because you can't spell or use correct grammar)
or 2) Stanford coaches ignored your kid and it's hurting your ego

I'm a HS coach (different sport) and this kind of toxic stuff is rampant among jealous parents. Believe me, it trickles down to kids' behavior as well, so do your daughter a favor and focus on something else! Stop embarassing yourself.

Lol, love when people change the subject without answering the question! Stanford is still a better academic school than most, but dropping out of the top 5 was surprising. Just as surprising as them not actively recruiting the best players if they want to improve their program. Many top players that I know cancelled their visits because they were offered elsewhere first. Poor recruiting tactics, and they're not the only school guilty.

Maybe, just maybe, said Top Players do not have the grades or their parents do not have or want to spend the $$ flying out west to see their daughter play. Maybe the player or the parents just want to be closer to home. Who knows but please stop with trying to diminish Stanford or their Lacrosse Program, If you spouted your nonsense publicly you would be laughed out of the room. No dog in the fight but does being ranked 5 or 6 or 10 really matter that much? Stanford is an elite university with a very competitive lacrosse program, I'm sure they will not miss the players who cancelled their visits.

Who knows why they did not get many top recruits this year as some have pointed out many top recruits are automatically a bad fit just due to academic and distance .The funny thing is if you include red shirt freshman their freshman class will be one of the top ranked in the country. The difficulty they will have is the same as USC ,lack of competition does not prepare them for a difficult NCAA tournament and the Inside lax over hyping machine will continue to try but until high school lacrosse spreads west it will be an uphill battle.

Considering Stanford is rated as one of the hardest university’s to get into in the US and has great lacrosse, no one should ever be diminishing it. Huge Congrats to any girl who has offers from here! Certainly cream of the crop student:/ athlete!

Agree that it is an elite school, but they do not get the "cream of the crop" The best girls in the grade have already, or about to commit elsewhere. They did not even accept official visit invites. Not sure why, probably because it's too far.

Standford does not start classes till late September. Hard to show athletes campus with no students on it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]

Lol, love when people change the subject without answering the question! Stanford is still a better academic school than most, but dropping out of the top 5 was surprising. Just as surprising as them not actively recruiting the best players if they want to improve their program. Many top players that I know cancelled their visits because they were offered elsewhere first. Poor recruiting tactics, and they're not the only school guilty.

Maybe, just maybe, said Top Players do not have the grades or their parents do not have or want to spend the $$ flying out west to see their daughter play. Maybe the player or the parents just want to be closer to home. Who knows but please stop with trying to diminish Stanford or their Lacrosse Program, If you spouted your nonsense publicly you would be laughed out of the room. No dog in the fight but does being ranked 5 or 6 or 10 really matter that much? Stanford is an elite university with a very competitive lacrosse program, I'm sure they will not miss the players who cancelled their visits.

Who knows why they did not get many top recruits this year as some have pointed out many top recruits are automatically a bad fit just due to academic and distance .The funny thing is if you include red shirt freshman their freshman class will be one of the top ranked in the country. The difficulty they will have is the same as USC ,lack of competition does not prepare them for a difficult NCAA tournament and the Inside lax over hyping machine will continue to try but until high school lacrosse spreads west it will be an uphill battle.

Considering Stanford is rated as one of the hardest university’s to get into in the US and has great lacrosse, no one should ever be diminishing it. Huge Congrats to any girl who has offers from here! Certainly cream of the crop student:/ athlete!

Agree that it is an elite school, but they do not get the "cream of the crop" The best girls in the grade have already, or about to commit elsewhere. They did not even accept official visit invites. Not sure why, probably because it's too far.

Standford does not start classes till late September. Hard to show athletes campus with no students on it.

The freshmen just moved in this past weekend. The 2021 class is pretty impressive.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

So, the troll on there who keeps trying to knock Stanford - you're so relentless with your negativity it strikes me that 1 of 2 things is happening here. Either:
1) your daughter wanted to go to Stanford but didn't have the academics and got dropped (which makes sense because you can't spell or use correct grammar)
or 2) Stanford coaches ignored your kid and it's hurting your ego

I'm a HS coach (different sport) and this kind of toxic stuff is rampant among jealous parents. Believe me, it trickles down to kids' behavior as well, so do your daughter a favor and focus on something else! Stop embarassing yourself.

Lol, love when people change the subject without answering the question! Stanford is still a better academic school than most, but dropping out of the top 5 was surprising. Just as surprising as them not actively recruiting the best players if they want to improve their program. Many top players that I know cancelled their visits because they were offered elsewhere first. Poor recruiting tactics, and they're not the only school guilty.

Maybe, just maybe, said Top Players do not have the grades or their parents do not have or want to spend the $$ flying out west to see their daughter play. Maybe the player or the parents just want to be closer to home. Who knows but please stop with trying to diminish Stanford or their Lacrosse Program, If you spouted your nonsense publicly you would be laughed out of the room. No dog in the fight but does being ranked 5 or 6 or 10 really matter that much? Stanford is an elite university with a very competitive lacrosse program, I'm sure they will not miss the players who cancelled their visits.

Who knows why they did not get many top recruits this year as some have pointed out many top recruits are automatically a bad fit just due to academic and distance .The funny thing is if you include red shirt freshman their freshman class will be one of the top ranked in the country. The difficulty they will have is the same as USC ,lack of competition does not prepare them for a difficult NCAA tournament and the Inside lax over hyping machine will continue to try but until high school lacrosse spreads west it will be an uphill battle.

Considering Stanford is rated as one of the hardest university’s to get into in the US and has great lacrosse, no one should ever be diminishing it. Huge Congrats to any girl who has offers from here! Certainly cream of the crop student:/ athlete!

Agree that it is an elite school, but they do not get the "cream of the crop" The best girls in the grade have already, or about to commit elsewhere. They did not even accept official visit invites. Not sure why, probably because it's too far.

Depending on your definition of “cream of the crop”!? Mine is highest academics and good athletics! Academics first, athletics second. The academics part of the equation is what’s going to get them some of the best job opportunities in the country. A Stanford education will speak louder than most!

Easy BBP dad.

Early Top 25 is out:

1 - Boston College - Until they lose.

2 - North Carolina - # 2 about right, certainly Top 5.

3 - Syracuse - Top 10 but #3 ? Don't think they get to the Final Four.

4 - Northwestern - They will likely be back to the Final Four.

5 - Notre Dame - Too high at # 5, might not be Top 10 at seasons end.

6 - Stony Brook - As usual over hyped, will not finish Top 10.

7 - Maryland - Better than # 7, will challenge to get back to Final Four.

8 - Loyola - Solid Program, should be decent year but will finish outside the Top 10.

9 - Duke - #9 is about right.

10 - Florida - Will finish between 5 - 10.

11 - Virginia - Will also be in the mix to finish Top 10.

12 - James Madison - No problem with them at #12.

13 - Stanford - #13 might be a bit high, probably 15 - 20 range.

14 - Princeton - Ivy's back to normal, Princeton Top 10.

15 - Denver - Denver has been very good, could be Top 10.

16 - Rutgers - Looked good last year. Can they remain in the Top 20?

17 - Jacksonville - a little high but OK. Will be in the mix to finish Top 20.

18 - Drexel - Great year for Dragons last year. Can they build on it. Did they lose their Coach?

19 - Penn - Again, Ivy's back to normal #19 too low. 10 - 15 range.

20 - Hopkins - Very solid program, # 20 a bit low, think they will finish higher.

21 - Louisville - OK at 21

22 - Richmond - Too high. Don't think they will finish Top 25.

23 - Penn State - Whats up in Happy Vally? Too low at 23 more like 10 - 15 even with the transfers.

24 - Michigan - Way too low at 24. Not sure Top 10 but definitely 10 - 20

25 - UConn - Ok

Others? USC, Towson, Hofstra, Navy, Arizona St, Colorado, Dartmouth?

It is tough to repeat, Carolina will be on the warpath, a lot of changes at Syracuse, Northwester will be tough

Final Four: Boston College, North Carolina, Northwestern, ????

Fight it out..... : Syracuse, Maryland, Virginia, Florida, Princeton, Duke, Denver. Notre Dame?

Michigan is way too @ 24 Stony Brook way too high @ 6. Curious to see what happens at PSU, Drexel, Syracuse and Rutgers.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Early Top 25 is out:

1 - Boston College - Until they lose.

2 - North Carolina - # 2 about right, certainly Top 5.

3 - Syracuse - Top 10 but #3 ? Don't think they get to the Final Four.

4 - Northwestern - They will likely be back to the Final Four.

5 - Notre Dame - Too high at # 5, might not be Top 10 at seasons end.

6 - Stony Brook - As usual over hyped, will not finish Top 10.

7 - Maryland - Better than # 7, will challenge to get back to Final Four.

8 - Loyola - Solid Program, should be decent year but will finish outside the Top 10.

9 - Duke - #9 is about right.

10 - Florida - Will finish between 5 - 10.

11 - Virginia - Will also be in the mix to finish Top 10.

12 - James Madison - No problem with them at #12.

13 - Stanford - #13 might be a bit high, probably 15 - 20 range.

14 - Princeton - Ivy's back to normal, Princeton Top 10.

15 - Denver - Denver has been very good, could be Top 10.

16 - Rutgers - Looked good last year. Can they remain in the Top 20?

17 - Jacksonville - a little high but OK. Will be in the mix to finish Top 20.

18 - Drexel - Great year for Dragons last year. Can they build on it. Did they lose their Coach?

19 - Penn - Again, Ivy's back to normal #19 too low. 10 - 15 range.

20 - Hopkins - Very solid program, # 20 a bit low, think they will finish higher.

21 - Louisville - OK at 21

22 - Richmond - Too high. Don't think they will finish Top 25.

23 - Penn State - Whats up in Happy Vally? Too low at 23 more like 10 - 15 even with the transfers.

24 - Michigan - Way too low at 24. Not sure Top 10 but definitely 10 - 20

25 - UConn - Ok

Others? USC, Towson, Hofstra, Navy, Arizona St, Colorado, Dartmouth?

It is tough to repeat, Carolina will be on the warpath, a lot of changes at Syracuse, Northwester will be tough

Final Four: Boston College, North Carolina, Northwestern, ????

Fight it out..... : Syracuse, Maryland, Virginia, Florida, Princeton, Duke, Denver. Notre Dame?

Michigan is way too @ 24 Stony Brook way too high @ 6. Curious to see what happens at PSU, Drexel, Syracuse and Rutgers.

It's become pretty obvious that nobody really cares about girls/woman's lacrosse much at all besides he parents of the players. The boys/men get all the attention and articles written about them in IL and LM, while girls are completely ignored. Very sad but true. The "professional" woman's lax is such a joke as well. Lacrosse can get your daughter into a great school. That's about it. Very sad!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Early Top 25 is out:

1 - Boston College - Until they lose.

2 - North Carolina - # 2 about right, certainly Top 5.

3 - Syracuse - Top 10 but #3 ? Don't think they get to the Final Four.

4 - Northwestern - They will likely be back to the Final Four.

5 - Notre Dame - Too high at # 5, might not be Top 10 at seasons end.

6 - Stony Brook - As usual over hyped, will not finish Top 10.

7 - Maryland - Better than # 7, will challenge to get back to Final Four.

8 - Loyola - Solid Program, should be decent year but will finish outside the Top 10.

9 - Duke - #9 is about right.

10 - Florida - Will finish between 5 - 10.

11 - Virginia - Will also be in the mix to finish Top 10.

12 - James Madison - No problem with them at #12.

13 - Stanford - #13 might be a bit high, probably 15 - 20 range.

14 - Princeton - Ivy's back to normal, Princeton Top 10.

15 - Denver - Denver has been very good, could be Top 10.

16 - Rutgers - Looked good last year. Can they remain in the Top 20?

17 - Jacksonville - a little high but OK. Will be in the mix to finish Top 20.

18 - Drexel - Great year for Dragons last year. Can they build on it. Did they lose their Coach?

19 - Penn - Again, Ivy's back to normal #19 too low. 10 - 15 range.

20 - Hopkins - Very solid program, # 20 a bit low, think they will finish higher.

21 - Louisville - OK at 21

22 - Richmond - Too high. Don't think they will finish Top 25.

23 - Penn State - Whats up in Happy Vally? Too low at 23 more like 10 - 15 even with the transfers.

24 - Michigan - Way too low at 24. Not sure Top 10 but definitely 10 - 20

25 - UConn - Ok

Others? USC, Towson, Hofstra, Navy, Arizona St, Colorado, Dartmouth?

It is tough to repeat, Carolina will be on the warpath, a lot of changes at Syracuse, Northwester will be tough

Final Four: Boston College, North Carolina, Northwestern, ????

Fight it out..... : Syracuse, Maryland, Virginia, Florida, Princeton, Duke, Denver. Notre Dame?

Michigan is way too @ 24 Stony Brook way too high @ 6. Curious to see what happens at PSU, Drexel, Syracuse and Rutgers.

It's become pretty obvious that nobody really cares about girls/woman's lacrosse much at all besides he parents of the players. The boys/men get all the attention and articles written about them in IL and LM, while girls are completely ignored. Very sad but true. The "professional" woman's lax is such a joke as well. Lacrosse can get your daughter into a great school. That's about it. Very sad!

Nothing Sad about it. What are the rest of the Long Island High School Athletes looking forward to?

Sorry, I have never understood you or people who think like you.

Girls/women’s lacrosse offers our daughters more opportunities than anything else.

What is your point? Do you not want your daughter to go to a good / great university and possibly get some financial help?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Early Top 25 is out:

1 - Boston College - Until they lose.

2 - North Carolina - # 2 about right, certainly Top 5.

3 - Syracuse - Top 10 but #3 ? Don't think they get to the Final Four.

4 - Northwestern - They will likely be back to the Final Four.

5 - Notre Dame - Too high at # 5, might not be Top 10 at seasons end.

6 - Stony Brook - As usual over hyped, will not finish Top 10.

7 - Maryland - Better than # 7, will challenge to get back to Final Four.

8 - Loyola - Solid Program, should be decent year but will finish outside the Top 10.

9 - Duke - #9 is about right.

10 - Florida - Will finish between 5 - 10.

11 - Virginia - Will also be in the mix to finish Top 10.

12 - James Madison - No problem with them at #12.

13 - Stanford - #13 might be a bit high, probably 15 - 20 range.

14 - Princeton - Ivy's back to normal, Princeton Top 10.

15 - Denver - Denver has been very good, could be Top 10.

16 - Rutgers - Looked good last year. Can they remain in the Top 20?

17 - Jacksonville - a little high but OK. Will be in the mix to finish Top 20.

18 - Drexel - Great year for Dragons last year. Can they build on it. Did they lose their Coach?

19 - Penn - Again, Ivy's back to normal #19 too low. 10 - 15 range.

20 - Hopkins - Very solid program, # 20 a bit low, think they will finish higher.

21 - Louisville - OK at 21

22 - Richmond - Too high. Don't think they will finish Top 25.

23 - Penn State - Whats up in Happy Vally? Too low at 23 more like 10 - 15 even with the transfers.

24 - Michigan - Way too low at 24. Not sure Top 10 but definitely 10 - 20

25 - UConn - Ok

Others? USC, Towson, Hofstra, Navy, Arizona St, Colorado, Dartmouth?

It is tough to repeat, Carolina will be on the warpath, a lot of changes at Syracuse, Northwester will be tough

Final Four: Boston College, North Carolina, Northwestern, ????

Fight it out..... : Syracuse, Maryland, Virginia, Florida, Princeton, Duke, Denver. Notre Dame?

Michigan is way too @ 24 Stony Brook way too high @ 6. Curious to see what happens at PSU, Drexel, Syracuse and Rutgers.

It's become pretty obvious that nobody really cares about girls/woman's lacrosse much at all besides he parents of the players. The boys/men get all the attention and articles written about them in IL and LM, while girls are completely ignored. Very sad but true. The "professional" woman's lax is such a joke as well. Lacrosse can get your daughter into a great school. That's about it. Very sad!

Great run down on the upcoming year! Very well spelled out. Let’s see how it all turns out? But, It sounds that poster certainly seems to know what they are talking about!

To the “sad” poster…. Getting into a great school with perhaps a boost from Lacrosse is nothing to be “SAD” about. It Will make for great opportunities and great futures for many girls who play the sport! It’s a GREAT sport!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Early Top 25 is out:

1 - Boston College - Until they lose.

2 - North Carolina - # 2 about right, certainly Top 5.

3 - Syracuse - Top 10 but #3 ? Don't think they get to the Final Four.

4 - Northwestern - They will likely be back to the Final Four.

5 - Notre Dame - Too high at # 5, might not be Top 10 at seasons end.

6 - Stony Brook - As usual over hyped, will not finish Top 10.

7 - Maryland - Better than # 7, will challenge to get back to Final Four.

8 - Loyola - Solid Program, should be decent year but will finish outside the Top 10.

9 - Duke - #9 is about right.

10 - Florida - Will finish between 5 - 10.

11 - Virginia - Will also be in the mix to finish Top 10.

12 - James Madison - No problem with them at #12.

13 - Stanford - #13 might be a bit high, probably 15 - 20 range.

14 - Princeton - Ivy's back to normal, Princeton Top 10.

15 - Denver - Denver has been very good, could be Top 10.

16 - Rutgers - Looked good last year. Can they remain in the Top 20?

17 - Jacksonville - a little high but OK. Will be in the mix to finish Top 20.

18 - Drexel - Great year for Dragons last year. Can they build on it. Did they lose their Coach?

19 - Penn - Again, Ivy's back to normal #19 too low. 10 - 15 range.

20 - Hopkins - Very solid program, # 20 a bit low, think they will finish higher.

21 - Louisville - OK at 21

22 - Richmond - Too high. Don't think they will finish Top 25.

23 - Penn State - Whats up in Happy Vally? Too low at 23 more like 10 - 15 even with the transfers.

24 - Michigan - Way too low at 24. Not sure Top 10 but definitely 10 - 20

25 - UConn - Ok

Others? USC, Towson, Hofstra, Navy, Arizona St, Colorado, Dartmouth?

It is tough to repeat, Carolina will be on the warpath, a lot of changes at Syracuse, Northwester will be tough

Final Four: Boston College, North Carolina, Northwestern, ????

Fight it out..... : Syracuse, Maryland, Virginia, Florida, Princeton, Duke, Denver. Notre Dame?

Michigan is way too @ 24 Stony Brook way too high @ 6. Curious to see what happens at PSU, Drexel, Syracuse and Rutgers.

It's become pretty obvious that nobody really cares about girls/woman's lacrosse much at all besides he parents of the players. The boys/men get all the attention and articles written about them in IL and LM, while girls are completely ignored. Very sad but true. The "professional" woman's lax is such a joke as well. Lacrosse can get your daughter into a great school. That's about it. Very sad!

So…. Do you think the same regarding men/womens college-track, soccer, swimming, golf, rowing, volleyball, tennis, waterpolo, fencing, rifle, skiing. Your statement is foolish and in your words “a joke”. College sports is about the athlete and competing. Your lack of knowledge regarding college athletics is astounding.

What would be considered a good Athletic scholarship at a top 10 school? 25%? Are some girls getting 40-50 or more?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What would be considered a good Athletic scholarship at a top 10 school? 25%? Are some girls getting 40-50 or more?

50% is not unrealistic for the right player

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What would be considered a good Athletic scholarship at a top 10 school? 25%? Are some girls getting 40-50 or more?

Every situation is different. What they offer does tell you where you stand on their list.

The coaches # 1 will be offered more than the others, some will be offered a “spot” and nothing more.

Again, every situation is different, some would consider 30% at Northwestern as a low or not great offer . Others would jump at no $$ but a spot at Northwestern.

At Top 10 Programs which is really Top 8 because Princeton and Penn are two of the Top 10 Programs and they do not give athletic scholarships.

Only the top 2 or 3 incoming players at Top 10 programs get significant athletic $$. We are talking about maybe 15 - 20 players from the entire country.

Remember, Transfers are getting $$ as well.

25-30% is the norm. They have to divide 12.5 tuitions over 40 + players. The top tier players that have committed so far are getting 50% min and higher. But that is only for the very few.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What would be considered a good Athletic scholarship at a top 10 school? 25%? Are some girls getting 40-50 or more?

50% is not unrealistic for the right player

50% is common for at least a couple/few players in each incoming class. Couple years ago daughter had a few teams in top 10 offer. Several were 50% of full cost and one was 100%. Then the lower lax rank the team, and the lower academic rank the team, the more they seem to offer if the are trying to land top tier kids. When you get offers, make sure they are talking % of total cost and not % of tuition. Some coaches will offer 100% tuition (or some % of tuition) because it sounds amazing, but when you convert it to total cost it becomes a much less percentage of the total cost.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What would be considered a good Athletic scholarship at a top 10 school? 25%? Are some girls getting 40-50 or more?

I know it’s not Top 10 but if money is a concern, don’t forget that a recruit can get both athletic and academic money playing D2. I know several players who are playing at Top D2 programs and have almost the entire cost to attend covered by both an academic and athletic combined scholarship. And they are the super star of their teams which has made the experience a lot of fun for them.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What would be considered a good Athletic scholarship at a top 10 school? 25%? Are some girls getting 40-50 or more?

I know it’s not Top 10 but if money is a concern, don’t forget that a recruit can get both athletic and academic money playing D2. I know several players who are playing at Top D2 programs and have almost the entire cost to attend covered by both an academic and athletic combined scholarship. And they are the super star of their teams which has made the experience a lot of fun for them.

Stacking athletic and academic can be done at the D1 level also

Originally Posted by Anonymous

What would be considered a good Athletic scholarship at a top 10 school? 25%? Are some girls getting 40-50 or more?

50% is not unrealistic for the right player

50% is common for at least a couple/few players in each incoming class. Couple years ago daughter had a few teams in top 10 offer. Several were 50% of full cost and one was 100%. Then the lower lax rank the team, and the lower academic rank the team, the more they seem to offer if the are trying to land top tier kids. When you get offers, make sure they are talking % of total cost and not % of tuition. Some coaches will offer 100% tuition (or some % of tuition) because it sounds amazing, but when you convert it to total cost it becomes a much less percentage of the total cost.

Also, at well endowed schools, if you make less than 200k, you're probably looking at half the school cost covered by grants, and then non-ivies can give little more on top of that.

With regard to scholarship % I think the above advice does not take into account the fact that very good D1 programs are balancing 5 years of athletes into the scholarship pool this year and going forward for at least 2 more years. I think 50% is unrealistic unless you are a top goalie or lefty attacker with a million stats. Had a top 10 rated kid last year get 35% and the recruiting director said that was high for 'the new normal'.

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Lol, definitely not all of them! FACT!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

And you know this how?

And at least 3 from LI full rides.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And at least 3 from LI full rides.

Are you connected to a club? How do you know this?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

is your daughter one of them ? if not how do you know for a fact ?

It’s a troll

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Fact??? That’s hysterical 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Fact??? That’s hysterical 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Top programs def offer full rides

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Fact??? That’s hysterical 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Top programs def offer full rides

Do you know a program in particular that offered a full ride this year?

No they don’t, it’s very rare

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Fact??? That’s hysterical 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Top programs def offer full rides

Wrong. It's actually lower programs that offer the full ride in the hopes of snagging a top recruit who could elevate their program. The top schools don't have to offer over 50% because they get those top recruits regardless. Not saying it never happens, but it is extremely rare, and more likely for a transfer who has already proven herself. Many of these "top recruits" will not turn into top college players. Coaches know this and don't want to tie up all their funds on a bench warmer.

That sounds rt. But not the top of the first tier. The girls That committed last week. Big money. The next level down you are spot on

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Fact??? That’s hysterical 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Top programs def offer full rides

Wrong. It's actually lower programs that offer the full ride in the hopes of snagging a top recruit who could elevate their program. The top schools don't have to offer over 50% because they get those top recruits regardless. Not saying it never happens, but it is extremely rare, and more likely for a transfer who has already proven herself. Many of these "top recruits" will not turn into top college players. Coaches know this and don't want to tie up all their funds on a bench warmer.

Actually, many of the top recruits do turn into top college players. You are correct about lower tier programs trying to entice top tier recruits with $$. The #1 recruit at the top programs can and do get more than 50%. Not every recruit at BC, UNC, MD, Northwestern are equal, there is a #1 and a #8 they do not get the same, some may get nothing.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Fact??? That’s hysterical 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Top programs def offer full rides

Wrong. It's actually lower programs that offer the full ride in the hopes of snagging a top recruit who could elevate their program. The top schools don't have to offer over 50% because they get those top recruits regardless. Not saying it never happens, but it is extremely rare, and more likely for a transfer who has already proven herself. Many of these "top recruits" will not turn into top college players. Coaches know this and don't want to tie up all their funds on a bench warmer.

Actually, many of the top recruits do turn into top college players. You are correct about lower tier programs trying to entice top tier recruits with $$. The #1 recruit at the top programs can and do get more than 50%. Not every recruit at BC, UNC, MD, Northwestern are equal, there is a #1 and a #8 they do not get the same, some may get nothing.

Many do....many don't . It's a gamble

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Fact??? That’s hysterical 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Top programs def offer full rides

Wrong. It's actually lower programs that offer the full ride in the hopes of snagging a top recruit who could elevate their program. The top schools don't have to offer over 50% because they get those top recruits regardless. Not saying it never happens, but it is extremely rare, and more likely for a transfer who has already proven herself. Many of these "top recruits" will not turn into top college players. Coaches know this and don't want to tie up all their funds on a bench warmer.

Actually, many of the top recruits do turn into top college players. You are correct about lower tier programs trying to entice top tier recruits with $$. The #1 recruit at the top programs can and do get more than 50%. Not every recruit at BC, UNC, MD, Northwestern are equal, there is a #1 and a #8 they do not get the same, some may get nothing.

Many do....many don't . It's a gamble

There are always people on here saying: "Many of these "top recruits" will not turn into top college players" or something similar "they will never see the field" "they will disappear in college" etc... It is simply not true at all, it has been documented many times on BOC how the Top Recruits (Inside Lacrosse top 40 young gun seniors, Under Armour Senior All-Americans) do in college and in general the large majority do very well.

Here we go again...

- 2016 Under Armour Senior All-American Girls

- 48 Players

- 41 developed into Starters / Regulars playing every game.

- There were at least 22 All-Conference players

- There were at least 15 All-Americans.

- There were at least 15 Team Captains.

- There were 3-5 players that had an injury that affected or ended career.

- There were 4-5 players that were reserve players for their entire career, they did not see much playing time.

Despite the narrative that "top recruits will disappear in college", the reality is that the large majority go on to have very successful college careers at many of the very best college programs.

Keep in mind that the majority of these players go to the best programs, if you work your way into playing every game at a Top 10 program you are doing pretty well and would likely be a "star" at just about all other programs.

I choose this group because I am very familiar with this class and they have all gone through their full college career.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Fact??? That’s hysterical 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Top programs def offer full rides

Read Scholarship Myth (US Lax, September 2017)

The NCAA limits Division I women’s programs to 12 (per school year)…. simple math can yield the unlikelihood of a prospect earning a full athletic scholarship.

2020-2021 season rosters:

BC; 37 players (11 Fresh., 10 Soph., 7 Jr., 7 Sr. and 2 Grads)
Cuse: 46 players (9 Fresh., 8 Soph., 9 Jr., 9 Sr. and 11 Grads)
NC: 40 players (13 Fresh., 10 Soph., 5 Jr., 9 Sr and 3 Grads)
NW: 37 players (6 Fresh., 12 Soph., 6 Jr., 10 Sr. and 3 Grads)

Look at the roster sizes above and try and explain how a single player can receive a full athletic scholarship when only 12 are available for the whole team.

Also, can you imagine if one player receives a full scholarship and becomes (injured / ineligible / decides to transfer) and how that would impact the trajectory of the program.

Parents/players exaggerate the package (merit and scholarship) they receive and simply say my kid received a full athletic scholarship, because they are proud of their kid and uninformed (delusional) people just keep repeating what they have been told.

No one receives a DI lacrosse full athletic scholarship.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Fact??? That’s hysterical 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Top programs def offer full rides

Read Scholarship Myth (US Lax, September 2017)

The NCAA limits Division I women’s programs to 12 (per school year)…. simple math can yield the unlikelihood of a prospect earning a full athletic scholarship.

2020-2021 season rosters:

BC; 37 players (11 Fresh., 10 Soph., 7 Jr., 7 Sr. and 2 Grads)
Cuse: 46 players (9 Fresh., 8 Soph., 9 Jr., 9 Sr. and 11 Grads)
NC: 40 players (13 Fresh., 10 Soph., 5 Jr., 9 Sr and 3 Grads)
NW: 37 players (6 Fresh., 12 Soph., 6 Jr., 10 Sr. and 3 Grads)

Look at the roster sizes above and try and explain how a single player can receive a full athletic scholarship when only 12 are available for the whole team.

Also, can you imagine if one player receives a full scholarship and becomes (injured / ineligible / decides to transfer) and how that would impact the trajectory of the program.

Parents/players exaggerate the package (merit and scholarship) they receive and simply say my kid received a full athletic scholarship, because they are proud of their kid and uninformed (delusional) people just keep repeating what they have been told.

No one receives a DI lacrosse full athletic scholarship.

You sound like you know but you are flat out wrong.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Fact??? That’s hysterical 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Top programs def offer full rides

Read Scholarship Myth (US Lax, September 2017)

The NCAA limits Division I women’s programs to 12 (per school year)…. simple math can yield the unlikelihood of a prospect earning a full athletic scholarship.

2020-2021 season rosters:

BC; 37 players (11 Fresh., 10 Soph., 7 Jr., 7 Sr. and 2 Grads)
Cuse: 46 players (9 Fresh., 8 Soph., 9 Jr., 9 Sr. and 11 Grads)
NC: 40 players (13 Fresh., 10 Soph., 5 Jr., 9 Sr and 3 Grads)
NW: 37 players (6 Fresh., 12 Soph., 6 Jr., 10 Sr. and 3 Grads)

Look at the roster sizes above and try and explain how a single player can receive a full athletic scholarship when only 12 are available for the whole team.

Also, can you imagine if one player receives a full scholarship and becomes (injured / ineligible / decides to transfer) and how that would impact the trajectory of the program.

Parents/players exaggerate the package (merit and scholarship) they receive and simply say my kid received a full athletic scholarship, because they are proud of their kid and uninformed (delusional) people just keep repeating what they have been told.

No one receives a DI lacrosse full athletic scholarship.

You sound like you know but you are flat out wrong.

Not the poster but would agree. Maybe ask your club directors or coaches many who have played at the D1 level and many who were darn good recruits

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Fact??? That’s hysterical 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Top programs def offer full rides

Read Scholarship Myth (US Lax, September 2017)

The NCAA limits Division I women’s programs to 12 (per school year)…. simple math can yield the unlikelihood of a prospect earning a full athletic scholarship.

2020-2021 season rosters:

BC; 37 players (11 Fresh., 10 Soph., 7 Jr., 7 Sr. and 2 Grads)
Cuse: 46 players (9 Fresh., 8 Soph., 9 Jr., 9 Sr. and 11 Grads)
NC: 40 players (13 Fresh., 10 Soph., 5 Jr., 9 Sr and 3 Grads)
NW: 37 players (6 Fresh., 12 Soph., 6 Jr., 10 Sr. and 3 Grads)

Look at the roster sizes above and try and explain how a single player can receive a full athletic scholarship when only 12 are available for the whole team.

Also, can you imagine if one player receives a full scholarship and becomes (injured / ineligible / decides to transfer) and how that would impact the trajectory of the program.

Parents/players exaggerate the package (merit and scholarship) they receive and simply say my kid received a full athletic scholarship, because they are proud of their kid and uninformed (delusional) people just keep repeating what they have been told.

No one receives a DI lacrosse full athletic scholarship.

You sound like you know but you are flat out wrong.

Do you personally know someone who has received a full academic scholarship to a D1 school? If so, from what club and yo what school?

Yes. 3 so far. All committed by 9/12

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Yes. 3 so far. All committed by 9/12

LI girls?

Yes.

Perhaps when “Athletic Scholarship” Plus some “academic” whether warranted or not, plus some “in-state” tuition rates, etc. might equal a “Full Ride” for some and to Them...that is the end result-no $. Might not be a “Full Ride” from the 12 athletic Scholarships available.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Yes.

What schools gave full rides?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Disagree. Of the group that have committed so far all of these girls are getting offered 50% minimum or greater. Fact.

Fact??? That’s hysterical 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Top programs def offer full rides

Read Scholarship Myth (US Lax, September 2017)

The NCAA limits Division I women’s programs to 12 (per school year)…. simple math can yield the unlikelihood of a prospect earning a full athletic scholarship.

2020-2021 season rosters:

BC; 37 players (11 Fresh., 10 Soph., 7 Jr., 7 Sr. and 2 Grads)
Cuse: 46 players (9 Fresh., 8 Soph., 9 Jr., 9 Sr. and 11 Grads)
NC: 40 players (13 Fresh., 10 Soph., 5 Jr., 9 Sr and 3 Grads)
NW: 37 players (6 Fresh., 12 Soph., 6 Jr., 10 Sr. and 3 Grads)

Look at the roster sizes above and try and explain how a single player can receive a full athletic scholarship when only 12 are available for the whole team.

Also, can you imagine if one player receives a full scholarship and becomes (injured / ineligible / decides to transfer) and how that would impact the trajectory of the program.

Parents/players exaggerate the package (merit and scholarship) they receive and simply say my kid received a full athletic scholarship, because they are proud of their kid and uninformed (delusional) people just keep repeating what they have been told.

No one receives a DI lacrosse full athletic scholarship.

You sound like you know but you are flat out wrong.

Do you personally know someone who has received a full academic scholarship to a D1 school? If so, from what club and yo what school?

The poster can't tell you because it's not true. As someone else stated, there is often creative financing which can appear as a full ride, but NO SCHOOL GIVES A 100% ATHLETIC SCHOLARSHIP. The top recruits might get 50-75% if they are truly exceptional. There is usually only one girl in the grade that fits this description, For the 2023s, the girl is going to BC. There is no way she is getting more than 50-75% athletic money. Have you seen their roster? Do the math!!

I agree with everything just posted except....the Best in the grade is from Grizzlies and is going to UNC. The YJ and Jesters girls going to BC might be next. BTW...I am a YJ.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I agree with everything just posted except....the Best in the grade is from Grizzlies and is going to UNC. The YJ and Jesters girls going to BC might be next. BTW...I am a YJ.

Oh yes, that was a mistake. I meant Grizzlies to UNC, not BC. After her, there are a bunch tied for second. The YJ girl is good, yes, but no difference between her and several others. I would say she is the best YJ though

based on what I have read on BOTC, what I have heard people say and my experience navigating the recruiting process with two kids who currently play in college I am pretty sure that there are going to be a lot of disappointed / disgruntled Long Island parents in the coming weeks and months.

There are just too many delusional parents out there who believe their child is way better than she is. During the recruiting process the college coaches will let their actions speak and their actions will tell the parents where their daughter ranks. Too many parents think they know who all of the best players are and which players should be "ranked" or make a team i.e. UA, AS etc... or which Club Team is the best.

News flash, if the best college programs are not making offers it's a safe bet that the player is not considered to be a very strong player. If we look at the best college programs, the programs that are consistently in the Top 10-20 we will see maybe 25 Long Island players end up at these schools. There will be a very small number of players who receive offers from the top programs but for whatever reason choose to go elsewhere. For the most part the best players will have their choice of schools and they will more than likely find a home at one of the best college programs. The list of schools is pretty diverse in terms of academics, location, size of school etc...

College coaches do not recruit club teams, they recruit players and they recruit these players from all over the country, I doubt most parents from Long Island had any idea who Izzy Scane or Charolette North were when they were juniors in HS. I will guarantee every college coach worth their salt knew all about them.

I truly wish all of the players well but to some of the parents (not all ) just the ones who think they know who all of the best players are and obviously think their daughter is one of them many of you are in for a rude awakening.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

based on what I have read on BOTC, what I have heard people say and my experience navigating the recruiting process with two kids who currently play in college I am pretty sure that there are going to be a lot of disappointed / disgruntled Long Island parents in the coming weeks and months.

There are just too many delusional parents out there who believe their child is way better than she is. During the recruiting process the college coaches will let their actions speak and their actions will tell the parents where their daughter ranks. Too many parents think they know who all of the best players are and which players should be "ranked" or make a team i.e. UA, AS etc... or which Club Team is the best.

News flash, if the best college programs are not making offers it's a safe bet that the player is not considered to be a very strong player. If we look at the best college programs, the programs that are consistently in the Top 10-20 we will see maybe 25 Long Island players end up at these schools. There will be a very small number of players who receive offers from the top programs but for whatever reason choose to go elsewhere. For the most part the best players will have their choice of schools and they will more than likely find a home at one of the best college programs. The list of schools is pretty diverse in terms of academics, location, size of school etc...

College coaches do not recruit club teams, they recruit players and they recruit these players from all over the country, I doubt most parents from Long Island had any idea who Izzy Scane or Charolette North were when they were juniors in HS. I will guarantee every college coach worth their salt knew all about them.

I truly wish all of the players well but to some of the parents (not all ) just the ones who think they know who all of the best players are and obviously think their daughter is one of them many of you are in for a rude awakening.

Why are you stating a bunch of jibberish that people already know?? Yawn…… Is there an actual point in your message?? Confused at why you’re posting

Eye of beholder. Bully selfish play or team play. Which do you prefer?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

based on what I have read on BOTC, what I have heard people say and my experience navigating the recruiting process with two kids who currently play in college I am pretty sure that there are going to be a lot of disappointed / disgruntled Long Island parents in the coming weeks and months.

There are just too many delusional parents out there who believe their child is way better than she is. During the recruiting process the college coaches will let their actions speak and their actions will tell the parents where their daughter ranks. Too many parents think they know who all of the best players are and which players should be "ranked" or make a team i.e. UA, AS etc... or which Club Team is the best.

News flash, if the best college programs are not making offers it's a safe bet that the player is not considered to be a very strong player. If we look at the best college programs, the programs that are consistently in the Top 10-20 we will see maybe 25 Long Island players end up at these schools. There will be a very small number of players who receive offers from the top programs but for whatever reason choose to go elsewhere. For the most part the best players will have their choice of schools and they will more than likely find a home at one of the best college programs. The list of schools is pretty diverse in terms of academics, location, size of school etc...

College coaches do not recruit club teams, they recruit players and they recruit these players from all over the country, I doubt most parents from Long Island had any idea who Izzy Scane or Charolette North were when they were juniors in HS. I will guarantee every college coach worth their salt knew all about them.

I truly wish all of the players well but to some of the parents (not all ) just the ones who think they know who all of the best players are and obviously think their daughter is one of them many of you are in for a rude awakening.

Why are you stating a bunch of jibberish that people already know?? Yawn…… Is there an actual point in your message?? Confused at why you’re posting

It’s gibberish. If you already know and you find it boring why do you take the time to engage? If as you say that “people already know” why are you asking what the actual point of the post is? Apparently you are confused often.

As to his point …. I would say it’s pretty clear, there are a lot of delusional parents who think they know it all (who the best players are, who the best club team is, who should and shouldn’t make certain teams, how much scholarship $$ kids get, etc…). They also try to diminish any accolade, list, ranking or team that their daughter doesn’t make. They cry politics and friends and family network and call BS when their kid is not recognizing. Obviously these parents think their daughter is a top notch player who should be recognized.

The recruiting process will tell us all where the players stand. Some, not very many will be offered spots by the best college programs but most will not.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

based on what I have read on BOTC, what I have heard people say and my experience navigating the recruiting process with two kids who currently play in college I am pretty sure that there are going to be a lot of disappointed / disgruntled Long Island parents in the coming weeks and months.

There are just too many delusional parents out there who believe their child is way better than she is. During the recruiting process the college coaches will let their actions speak and their actions will tell the parents where their daughter ranks. Too many parents think they know who all of the best players are and which players should be "ranked" or make a team i.e. UA, AS etc... or which Club Team is the best.

News flash, if the best college programs are not making offers it's a safe bet that the player is not considered to be a very strong player. If we look at the best college programs, the programs that are consistently in the Top 10-20 we will see maybe 25 Long Island players end up at these schools. There will be a very small number of players who receive offers from the top programs but for whatever reason choose to go elsewhere. For the most part the best players will have their choice of schools and they will more than likely find a home at one of the best college programs. The list of schools is pretty diverse in terms of academics, location, size of school etc...

College coaches do not recruit club teams, they recruit players and they recruit these players from all over the country, I doubt most parents from Long Island had any idea who Izzy Scane or Charolette North were when they were juniors in HS. I will guarantee every college coach worth their salt knew all about them.

I truly wish all of the players well but to some of the parents (not all ) just the ones who think they know who all of the best players are and obviously think their daughter is one of them many of you are in for a rude awakening.

Why are you stating a bunch of jibberish that people already know?? Yawn…… Is there an actual point in your message?? Confused at why you’re posting

It’s gibberish. If you already know and you find it boring why do you take the time to engage? If as you say that “people already know” why are you asking what the actual point of the post is? Apparently you are confused often.

As to his point …. I would say it’s pretty clear, there are a lot of delusional parents who think they know it all (who the best players are, who the best club team is, who should and shouldn’t make certain teams, how much scholarship $$ kids get, etc…). They also try to diminish any accolade, list, ranking or team that their daughter doesn’t make. They cry politics and friends and family network and call BS when their kid is not recognizing. Obviously these parents think their daughter is a top notch player who should be recognized.

The recruiting process will tell us all where the players stand. Some, not very many will be offered spots by the best college programs but most will not.

Pretty sure everyone already knows where their daughter stands. Don't need you preaching about it. What makes you think you're providing a "Newsflash"?? You are also very transparent in your message of "wishing all they players well" . Sure you do, lol

Originally Posted by Anonymous

based on what I have read on BOTC, what I have heard people say and my experience navigating the recruiting process with two kids who currently play in college I am pretty sure that there are going to be a lot of disappointed / disgruntled Long Island parents in the coming weeks and months.

There are just too many delusional parents out there who believe their child is way better than she is. During the recruiting process the college coaches will let their actions speak and their actions will tell the parents where their daughter ranks. Too many parents think they know who all of the best players are and which players should be "ranked" or make a team i.e. UA, AS etc... or which Club Team is the best.

News flash, if the best college programs are not making offers it's a safe bet that the player is not considered to be a very strong player. If we look at the best college programs, the programs that are consistently in the Top 10-20 we will see maybe 25 Long Island players end up at these schools. There will be a very small number of players who receive offers from the top programs but for whatever reason choose to go elsewhere. For the most part the best players will have their choice of schools and they will more than likely find a home at one of the best college programs. The list of schools is pretty diverse in terms of academics, location, size of school etc...

College coaches do not recruit club teams, they recruit players and they recruit these players from all over the country, I doubt most parents from Long Island had any idea who Izzy Scane or Charolette North were when they were juniors in HS. I will guarantee every college coach worth their salt knew all about them.

I truly wish all of the players well but to some of the parents (not all ) just the ones who think they know who all of the best players are and obviously think their daughter is one of them many of you are in for a rude awakening.

Why are you stating a bunch of jibberish that people already know?? Yawn…… Is there an actual point in your message?? Confused at why you’re posting

It’s gibberish. If you already know and you find it boring why do you take the time to engage? If as you say that “people already know” why are you asking what the actual point of the post is? Apparently you are confused often.

As to his point …. I would say it’s pretty clear, there are a lot of delusional parents who think they know it all (who the best players are, who the best club team is, who should and shouldn’t make certain teams, how much scholarship $$ kids get, etc…). They also try to diminish any accolade, list, ranking or team that their daughter doesn’t make. They cry politics and friends and family network and call BS when their kid is not recognizing. Obviously these parents think their daughter is a top notch player who should be recognized.

The recruiting process will tell us all where the players stand. Some, not very many will be offered spots by the best college programs but most will not.

Pretty sure everyone already knows where their daughter stands. Don't need you preaching about it. What makes you think you're providing a "Newsflash"?? You are also very transparent in your message of "wishing all they players well" . Sure you do, lol

If you think all parents know where their daughter stands you are delusional. Just look at all of the negative comments and attempts to tear down or diminish players, rankings teams etc... all in an effort to say there are many deserving players (including their daughter) who were not named, or selected for some sort of accolade. These parents blame politics, Friends and Family network, Club affiliation, other connections and any other excuse that they can dream up to discredit the accolade. The reality is that there are usually not many deserving players that are not recognized and the recruiting process will prove that fact.

I'm guessing that you are one of these parents because the above posts appear to bother you so much.

BTW, I actually do wish all of the players well, they are not the problem. The delusional, disgruntled, jealous parents are the problem.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

based on what I have read on BOTC, what I have heard people say and my experience navigating the recruiting process with two kids who currently play in college I am pretty sure that there are going to be a lot of disappointed / disgruntled Long Island parents in the coming weeks and months.

There are just too many delusional parents out there who believe their child is way better than she is. During the recruiting process the college coaches will let their actions speak and their actions will tell the parents where their daughter ranks. Too many parents think they know who all of the best players are and which players should be "ranked" or make a team i.e. UA, AS etc... or which Club Team is the best.

News flash, if the best college programs are not making offers it's a safe bet that the player is not considered to be a very strong player. If we look at the best college programs, the programs that are consistently in the Top 10-20 we will see maybe 25 Long Island players end up at these schools. There will be a very small number of players who receive offers from the top programs but for whatever reason choose to go elsewhere. For the most part the best players will have their choice of schools and they will more than likely find a home at one of the best college programs. The list of schools is pretty diverse in terms of academics, location, size of school etc...

College coaches do not recruit club teams, they recruit players and they recruit these players from all over the country, I doubt most parents from Long Island had any idea who Izzy Scane or Charolette North were when they were juniors in HS. I will guarantee every college coach worth their salt knew all about them.

I truly wish all of the players well but to some of the parents (not all ) just the ones who think they know who all of the best players are and obviously think their daughter is one of them many of you are in for a rude awakening.

Why are you stating a bunch of jibberish that people already know?? Yawn…… Is there an actual point in your message?? Confused at why you’re posting

It’s gibberish. If you already know and you find it boring why do you take the time to engage? If as you say that “people already know” why are you asking what the actual point of the post is? Apparently you are confused often.

As to his point …. I would say it’s pretty clear, there are a lot of delusional parents who think they know it all (who the best players are, who the best club team is, who should and shouldn’t make certain teams, how much scholarship $$ kids get, etc…). They also try to diminish any accolade, list, ranking or team that their daughter doesn’t make. They cry politics and friends and family network and call BS when their kid is not recognizing. Obviously these parents think their daughter is a top notch player who should be recognized.

The recruiting process will tell us all where the players stand. Some, not very many will be offered spots by the best college programs but most will not.

Pretty sure everyone already knows where their daughter stands. Don't need you preaching about it. What makes you think you're providing a "Newsflash"?? You are also very transparent in your message of "wishing all they players well" . Sure you do, lol

If you think all parents know where their daughter stands you are delusional. Just look at all of the negative comments and attempts to tear down or diminish players, rankings teams etc... all in an effort to say there are many deserving players (including their daughter) who were not named, or selected for some sort of accolade. These parents blame politics, Friends and Family network, Club affiliation, other connections and any other excuse that they can dream up to discredit the accolade. The reality is that there are usually not many deserving players that are not recognized and the recruiting process will prove that fact.

I'm guessing that you are one of these parents because the above posts appear to bother you so much.

BTW, I actually do wish all of the players well, they are not the problem. The delusional, disgruntled, jealous parents are the problem.

If my daughter committing to to a top academic and lacrosse school makes me delusional, so be it. You got the wrong person. You’re the one who sounds disgruntled and jealous. Who made excuses? I don’t even understand what you are ranting about!

I know what you are talking about. There are a lot of parents who think their kid is better than they actually are. I think I’ve been one of them! My kid was actually selected for many of the big accolades, unfortunately all during covid but anyone else getting that same accolade was also affected by covid. The accolades haven’t played out in recruiting at all. Seeing tons of commits, even some really nice commits from our team where she is very much a star player, but she just hasn’t gotten those kind of calls at all. Second guessing myself— I might have done something differently as a parent guiding the process.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I know what you are talking about. There are a lot of parents who think their kid is better than they actually are. I think I’ve been one of them! My kid was actually selected for many of the big accolades, unfortunately all during covid but anyone else getting that same accolade was also affected by covid. The accolades haven’t played out in recruiting at all. Seeing tons of commits, even some really nice commits from our team where she is very much a star player, but she just hasn’t gotten those kind of calls at all. Second guessing myself— I might have done something differently as a parent guiding the process.

Plenty of time to adjust. Reassess what schools you have been targeting and get busy. Have your coaches make calls and get to prospect camps. So much time left, but you really have to expand your list and take action ASAP. Our coach always told us not to neglect our backups. Lots of lax in November too. But you need to get on radar now. If your daughter has many accolades, there are schools that will be psyched to have her looking at them. Many schools go slower because they aren't top 25, but tons of great lacrosse beyond top 25.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I know what you are talking about. There are a lot of parents who think their kid is better than they actually are. I think I’ve been one of them! My kid was actually selected for many of the big accolades, unfortunately all during covid but anyone else getting that same accolade was also affected by covid. The accolades haven’t played out in recruiting at all. Seeing tons of commits, even some really nice commits from our team where she is very much a star player, but she just hasn’t gotten those kind of calls at all. Second guessing myself— I might have done something differently as a parent guiding the process.

Pretty sure they are talking about parents who cry politics , friends & family network, club affiliation, connections etc… trying to diminish whatever the accolade is because their daughter was not recognized.

It doesn’t sound like you or the other guy who’s daughter committed to a Top Academic/Top Lacrosse school.

You guys are really uninformed . Full athletic rides do happen , I can tell you UNC , USC , BC , all have players w 100 % cost of attendance scholarships and there are many other programs that have the same . How because these schools have many players that the school was an academic reach and have parents w money so they are willing to be happy with the help getting in .

Now we are seeing where all of those fees and money-grabs are taking us!

Wrong

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You guys are really uninformed . Full athletic rides do happen , I can tell you UNC , USC , BC , all have players w 100 % cost of attendance scholarships and there are many other programs that have the same . How because these schools have many players that the school was an academic reach and have parents w money so they are willing to be happy with the help getting in .

From experience on the boy's side, my son plays for a Big 10 school who is top 10 in lacrosse. He has the highest scholarship on his team. It's 70%. Boys rosters are larger than girls. It would be very unlikely that someone would get a full athletic scholarship. People who state that are probably combining other monies with the athletic aid.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You guys are really uninformed . Full athletic rides do happen , I can tell you UNC , USC , BC , all have players w 100 % cost of attendance scholarships and there are many other programs that have the same . How because these schools have many players that the school was an academic reach and have parents w money so they are willing to be happy with the help getting in .

From experience on the boy's side, my son plays for a Big 10 school who is top 10 in lacrosse. He has the highest scholarship on his team. It's 70%. Boys rosters are larger than girls. It would be very unlikely that someone would get a full athletic scholarship. People who state that are probably combining other monies with the athletic aid.

Agree ^^^ If they have 100% tuition covered, is more likely a combination of money, not just athletic. A fully funded team gets 12 and spending a full 1 of those on a single player is not done, especially for freshman and initial offer.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You guys are really uninformed . Full athletic rides do happen , I can tell you UNC , USC , BC , all have players w 100 % cost of attendance scholarships and there are many other programs that have the same . How because these schools have many players that the school was an academic reach and have parents w money so they are willing to be happy with the help getting in .

The reality is that people (in the lacrosse world) never want to believe any player is better or more deserving than their daughter. So, if their daughter was offered 20% they do not want to believe that anyone is offered more than that. If a player is told that their daughter needs to have a 31 or better ACT to go to HYP they will never believe that another player might only need a 28 ACT. There is one joker that was posting on the boys side that actually believes that the boys going to The Academy's and The Ivy's all had the grades, he does not want to believe that the coaches can help all that much. Why? Because his kid probably had very good grades (not good enough to get into a top academic school on his own) but was not a high caliber lacrosse player (which the parent can't understand) so the coaches were not willing to help with admissions. Same goes for scholarships, every situation is different, not every player / recruit is equal, not everyone gets a trophy. I would never say never, "rare" is more likely. From what I have seen, most coaches will not decrease a scholarship but they will increase if they feel the player deserves it. The above poster is correct, for many in the lacrosse world the prize is getting their daughter into a prestigious school that she would not be able to get into on her own, It's not just The Ivy's, Obviously Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, Hopkins, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, ND, Boston College... and don't forget about Michigan, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Penn State, Maryland.... It is not easy to get accepted to these State Schools from out of state. Not every kid has 95+ GPA, 30 SAT or 1300 SAT.... For many just getting in is great.

The real question is why do people care so much about what others are offered?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You guys are really uninformed . Full athletic rides do happen , I can tell you UNC , USC , BC , all have players w 100 % cost of attendance scholarships and there are many other programs that have the same . How because these schools have many players that the school was an academic reach and have parents w money so they are willing to be happy with the help getting in .

The reality is that people (in the lacrosse world) never want to believe any player is better or more deserving than their daughter. So, if their daughter was offered 20% they do not want to believe that anyone is offered more than that. If a player is told that their daughter needs to have a 31 or better ACT to go to HYP they will never believe that another player might only need a 28 ACT. There is one joker that was posting on the boys side that actually believes that the boys going to The Academy's and The Ivy's all had the grades, he does not want to believe that the coaches can help all that much. Why? Because his kid probably had very good grades (not good enough to get into a top academic school on his own) but was not a high caliber lacrosse player (which the parent can't understand) so the coaches were not willing to help with admissions. Same goes for scholarships, every situation is different, not every player / recruit is equal, not everyone gets a trophy. I would never say never, "rare" is more likely. From what I have seen, most coaches will not decrease a scholarship but they will increase if they feel the player deserves it. The above poster is correct, for many in the lacrosse world the prize is getting their daughter into a prestigious school that she would not be able to get into on her own, It's not just The Ivy's, Obviously Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, Hopkins, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, ND, Boston College... and don't forget about Michigan, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Penn State, Maryland.... It is not easy to get accepted to these State Schools from out of state. Not every kid has 95+ GPA, 30 SAT or 1300 SAT.... For many just getting in is great.

The real question is why do people care so much about what others are offered?

Agree. Also, there's a lack of appreciation in the comments for real financial need. It's not as if every lacrosse player has a wealthy family, despite the image of lacrosse. I know a number of players who have turned down spots at high rank schools because they were not the most coveted and therefore funded, and move onto a lower level team for more money. They end up being stars at their lower ranked schools too, where they were probably bench on top team.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You guys are really uninformed . Full athletic rides do happen , I can tell you UNC , USC , BC , all have players w 100 % cost of attendance scholarships and there are many other programs that have the same . How because these schools have many players that the school was an academic reach and have parents w money so they are willing to be happy with the help getting in .

The reality is that people (in the lacrosse world) never want to believe any player is better or more deserving than their daughter. So, if their daughter was offered 20% they do not want to believe that anyone is offered more than that. If a player is told that their daughter needs to have a 31 or better ACT to go to HYP they will never believe that another player might only need a 28 ACT. There is one joker that was posting on the boys side that actually believes that the boys going to The Academy's and The Ivy's all had the grades, he does not want to believe that the coaches can help all that much. Why? Because his kid probably had very good grades (not good enough to get into a top academic school on his own) but was not a high caliber lacrosse player (which the parent can't understand) so the coaches were not willing to help with admissions. Same goes for scholarships, every situation is different, not every player / recruit is equal, not everyone gets a trophy. I would never say never, "rare" is more likely. From what I have seen, most coaches will not decrease a scholarship but they will increase if they feel the player deserves it. The above poster is correct, for many in the lacrosse world the prize is getting their daughter into a prestigious school that she would not be able to get into on her own, It's not just The Ivy's, Obviously Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, Hopkins, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, ND, Boston College... and don't forget about Michigan, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Penn State, Maryland.... It is not easy to get accepted to these State Schools from out of state. Not every kid has 95+ GPA, 30 SAT or 1300 SAT.... For many just getting in is great.

The real question is why do people care so much about what others are offered?

Agree. Also, there's a lack of appreciation in the comments for real financial need. It's not as if every lacrosse player has a wealthy family, despite the image of lacrosse. I know a number of players who have turned down spots at high rank schools because they were not the most coveted and therefore funded, and move onto a lower level team for more money. They end up being stars at their lower ranked schools too, where they were probably bench on top team.

Also, for those with a GAI of 150-180k. It can be better to take the financial aid than the scholarship. You can wind up getting 50% or more at Duke, Northwestern, Stanford. Coach will also throw in about 7% more

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You guys are really uninformed . Full athletic rides do happen , I can tell you UNC , USC , BC , all have players w 100 % cost of attendance scholarships and there are many other programs that have the same . How because these schools have many players that the school was an academic reach and have parents w money so they are willing to be happy with the help getting in .

The reality is that people (in the lacrosse world) never want to believe any player is better or more deserving than their daughter. So, if their daughter was offered 20% they do not want to believe that anyone is offered more than that. If a player is told that their daughter needs to have a 31 or better ACT to go to HYP they will never believe that another player might only need a 28 ACT. There is one joker that was posting on the boys side that actually believes that the boys going to The Academy's and The Ivy's all had the grades, he does not want to believe that the coaches can help all that much. Why? Because his kid probably had very good grades (not good enough to get into a top academic school on his own) but was not a high caliber lacrosse player (which the parent can't understand) so the coaches were not willing to help with admissions. Same goes for scholarships, every situation is different, not every player / recruit is equal, not everyone gets a trophy. I would never say never, "rare" is more likely. From what I have seen, most coaches will not decrease a scholarship but they will increase if they feel the player deserves it. The above poster is correct, for many in the lacrosse world the prize is getting their daughter into a prestigious school that she would not be able to get into on her own, It's not just The Ivy's, Obviously Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, Hopkins, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, ND, Boston College... and don't forget about Michigan, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Penn State, Maryland.... It is not easy to get accepted to these State Schools from out of state. Not every kid has 95+ GPA, 30 SAT or 1300 SAT.... For many just getting in is great.

The real question is why do people care so much about what others are offered?

Agree. Also, there's a lack of appreciation in the comments for real financial need. It's not as if every lacrosse player has a wealthy family, despite the image of lacrosse. I know a number of players who have turned down spots at high rank schools because they were not the most coveted and therefore funded, and move onto a lower level team for more money. They end up being stars at their lower ranked schools too, where they were probably bench on top team.

Also, for those with a GAI of 150-180k. It can be better to take the financial aid than the scholarship. You can wind up getting 50% or more at Duke, Northwestern, Stanford. Coach will also throw in about 7% more

This is happening in the SEC too. Hoping that full amount that was referred to by Florida is beyond football! I think to give football players full amount, they will need to counterbalance with female athletes.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...with-significant-fallout-soon-to-follow/

Football SEC huge revenue sport.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You guys are really uninformed . Full athletic rides do happen , I can tell you UNC , USC , BC , all have players w 100 % cost of attendance scholarships and there are many other programs that have the same . How because these schools have many players that the school was an academic reach and have parents w money so they are willing to be happy with the help getting in .

The reality is that people (in the lacrosse world) never want to believe any player is better or more deserving than their daughter. So, if their daughter was offered 20% they do not want to believe that anyone is offered more than that. If a player is told that their daughter needs to have a 31 or better ACT to go to HYP they will never believe that another player might only need a 28 ACT. There is one joker that was posting on the boys side that actually believes that the boys going to The Academy's and The Ivy's all had the grades, he does not want to believe that the coaches can help all that much. Why? Because his kid probably had very good grades (not good enough to get into a top academic school on his own) but was not a high caliber lacrosse player (which the parent can't understand) so the coaches were not willing to help with admissions. Same goes for scholarships, every situation is different, not every player / recruit is equal, not everyone gets a trophy. I would never say never, "rare" is more likely. From what I have seen, most coaches will not decrease a scholarship but they will increase if they feel the player deserves it. The above poster is correct, for many in the lacrosse world the prize is getting their daughter into a prestigious school that she would not be able to get into on her own, It's not just The Ivy's, Obviously Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, Hopkins, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, ND, Boston College... and don't forget about Michigan, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Penn State, Maryland.... It is not easy to get accepted to these State Schools from out of state. Not every kid has 95+ GPA, 30 SAT or 1300 SAT.... For many just getting in is great.

The real question is why do people care so much about what others are offered?

Agree. Also, there's a lack of appreciation in the comments for real financial need. It's not as if every lacrosse player has a wealthy family, despite the image of lacrosse. I know a number of players who have turned down spots at high rank schools because they were not the most coveted and therefore funded, and move onto a lower level team for more money. They end up being stars at their lower ranked schools too, where they were probably bench on top team.

Also, for those with a GAI of 150-180k. It can be better to take the financial aid than the scholarship. You can wind up getting 50% or more at Duke, Northwestern, Stanford. Coach will also throw in about 7% more

This is happening in the SEC too. Hoping that full amount that was referred to by Florida is beyond football! I think to give football players full amount, they will need to counterbalance with female athletes.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...with-significant-fallout-soon-to-follow/

Sorry but that's sooo discrimanatory - there are indegenous and poor, underprivileged kids that play lacrosse too. I don't see the woke crowd debating that ?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You guys are really uninformed . Full athletic rides do happen , I can tell you UNC , USC , BC , all have players w 100 % cost of attendance scholarships and there are many other programs that have the same . How because these schools have many players that the school was an academic reach and have parents w money so they are willing to be happy with the help getting in .

The reality is that people (in the lacrosse world) never want to believe any player is better or more deserving than their daughter. So, if their daughter was offered 20% they do not want to believe that anyone is offered more than that. If a player is told that their daughter needs to have a 31 or better ACT to go to HYP they will never believe that another player might only need a 28 ACT. There is one joker that was posting on the boys side that actually believes that the boys going to The Academy's and The Ivy's all had the grades, he does not want to believe that the coaches can help all that much. Why? Because his kid probably had very good grades (not good enough to get into a top academic school on his own) but was not a high caliber lacrosse player (which the parent can't understand) so the coaches were not willing to help with admissions. Same goes for scholarships, every situation is different, not every player / recruit is equal, not everyone gets a trophy. I would never say never, "rare" is more likely. From what I have seen, most coaches will not decrease a scholarship but they will increase if they feel the player deserves it. The above poster is correct, for many in the lacrosse world the prize is getting their daughter into a prestigious school that she would not be able to get into on her own, It's not just The Ivy's, Obviously Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, Hopkins, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, ND, Boston College... and don't forget about Michigan, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Penn State, Maryland.... It is not easy to get accepted to these State Schools from out of state. Not every kid has 95+ GPA, 30 SAT or 1300 SAT.... For many just getting in is great.

The real question is why do people care so much about what others are offered?

Agree. Also, there's a lack of appreciation in the comments for real financial need. It's not as if every lacrosse player has a wealthy family, despite the image of lacrosse. I know a number of players who have turned down spots at high rank schools because they were not the most coveted and therefore funded, and move onto a lower level team for more money. They end up being stars at their lower ranked schools too, where they were probably bench on top team.

Also, for those with a GAI of 150-180k. It can be better to take the financial aid than the scholarship. You can wind up getting 50% or more at Duke, Northwestern, Stanford. Coach will also throw in about 7% more

This is happening in the SEC too. Hoping that full amount that was referred to by Florida is beyond football! I think to give football players full amount, they will need to counterbalance with female athletes.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...with-significant-fallout-soon-to-follow/

Football… BCS 1A allows for something like 86 “Full” athletic scholarships that are Total Cost to attend, FCS 1AA allows approximately 66 Full - total cost to attend athletic scholarships. Pretty sure BCS can only offer Full scholarships, FCS may be able to offer partial.

The money they are talking about is in addition to the Full Athletic Scholarships.

The thought that Big Time Football needs to be counterbalanced with female spots is laughable, it’s almost insane. What would make you think such a thought?

At the Big Time Football schools (Florida, Penn State, Michigan, Notre Dame, USC etc…) these programs generate hundreds of millions of dollars for the universities…, everyone is making money off the players…

Most other spots cost the school money, there is no comparison to Football or Men’s Basketball…. Nothing needs to be counterbalanced.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You guys are really uninformed . Full athletic rides do happen , I can tell you UNC , USC , BC , all have players w 100 % cost of attendance scholarships and there are many other programs that have the same . How because these schools have many players that the school was an academic reach and have parents w money so they are willing to be happy with the help getting in .

The reality is that people (in the lacrosse world) never want to believe any player is better or more deserving than their daughter. So, if their daughter was offered 20% they do not want to believe that anyone is offered more than that. If a player is told that their daughter needs to have a 31 or better ACT to go to HYP they will never believe that another player might only need a 28 ACT. There is one joker that was posting on the boys side that actually believes that the boys going to The Academy's and The Ivy's all had the grades, he does not want to believe that the coaches can help all that much. Why? Because his kid probably had very good grades (not good enough to get into a top academic school on his own) but was not a high caliber lacrosse player (which the parent can't understand) so the coaches were not willing to help with admissions. Same goes for scholarships, every situation is different, not every player / recruit is equal, not everyone gets a trophy. I would never say never, "rare" is more likely. From what I have seen, most coaches will not decrease a scholarship but they will increase if they feel the player deserves it. The above poster is correct, for many in the lacrosse world the prize is getting their daughter into a prestigious school that she would not be able to get into on her own, It's not just The Ivy's, Obviously Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, Hopkins, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, ND, Boston College... and don't forget about Michigan, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Penn State, Maryland.... It is not easy to get accepted to these State Schools from out of state. Not every kid has 95+ GPA, 30 SAT or 1300 SAT.... For many just getting in is great.

The real question is why do people care so much about what others are offered?

Agree. Also, there's a lack of appreciation in the comments for real financial need. It's not as if every lacrosse player has a wealthy family, despite the image of lacrosse. I know a number of players who have turned down spots at high rank schools because they were not the most coveted and therefore funded, and move onto a lower level team for more money. They end up being stars at their lower ranked schools too, where they were probably bench on top team.

Also, for those with a GAI of 150-180k. It can be better to take the financial aid than the scholarship. You can wind up getting 50% or more at Duke, Northwestern, Stanford. Coach will also throw in about 7% more

This is happening in the SEC too. Hoping that full amount that was referred to by Florida is beyond football! I think to give football players full amount, they will need to counterbalance with female athletes.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...with-significant-fallout-soon-to-follow/

Sorry but that's sooo discrimanatory - there are indegenous and poor, underprivileged kids that play lacrosse too. I don't see the woke crowd debating that ?

What in the world are you talking about? What is discriminatory ? Why are you bringing up Indegenous, poor, underprivileged kids?

Are you actually comparing lacrosse to SEC football? There is zero comparison. Lacrosse is not a revenue sport for a college. In fact, usually the opposite. SEC football is a huge revenue maker for their colleges and frankly, for their towns. 90K+ attendees at most games. Top head coaches earn multi-millions. Many SEC schools have NFL level facilities and players travel by private plane. Many SEC football players enter the NFL draft and go on to play professionally. There isn’t anything remotely close in lacrosse. Professional lacrosse for both men and women’s teams can’t even make a profit and struggle for spectators. College lacrosse although growing will never rival college football…especially in the SEC!

quote=Anonymous]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You guys are really uninformed . Full athletic rides do happen , I can tell you UNC , USC , BC , all have players w 100 % cost of attendance scholarships and there are many other programs that have the same . How because these schools have many players that the school was an academic reach and have parents w money so they are willing to be happy with the help getting in .

The reality is that people (in the lacrosse world) never want to believe any player is better or more deserving than their daughter. So, if their daughter was offered 20% they do not want to believe that anyone is offered more than that. If a player is told that their daughter needs to have a 31 or better ACT to go to HYP they will never believe that another player might only need a 28 ACT. There is one joker that was posting on the boys side that actually believes that the boys going to The Academy's and The Ivy's all had the grades, he does not want to believe that the coaches can help all that much. Why? Because his kid probably had very good grades (not good enough to get into a top academic school on his own) but was not a high caliber lacrosse player (which the parent can't understand) so the coaches were not willing to help with admissions. Same goes for scholarships, every situation is different, not every player / recruit is equal, not everyone gets a trophy. I would never say never, "rare" is more likely. From what I have seen, most coaches will not decrease a scholarship but they will increase if they feel the player deserves it. The above poster is correct, for many in the lacrosse world the prize is getting their daughter into a prestigious school that she would not be able to get into on her own, It's not just The Ivy's, Obviously Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, Hopkins, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, ND, Boston College... and don't forget about Michigan, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Penn State, Maryland.... It is not easy to get accepted to these State Schools from out of state. Not every kid has 95+ GPA, 30 SAT or 1300 SAT.... For many just getting in is great.

The real question is why do people care so much about what others are offered?

Agree. Also, there's a lack of appreciation in the comments for real financial need. It's not as if every lacrosse player has a wealthy family, despite the image of lacrosse. I know a number of players who have turned down spots at high rank schools because they were not the most coveted and therefore funded, and move onto a lower level team for more money. They end up being stars at their lower ranked schools too, where they were probably bench on top team.

Also, for those with a GAI of 150-180k. It can be better to take the financial aid than the scholarship. You can wind up getting 50% or more at Duke, Northwestern, Stanford. Coach will also throw in about 7% more

This is happening in the SEC too. Hoping that full amount that was referred to by Florida is beyond football! I think to give football players full amount, they will need to counterbalance with female athletes.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...with-significant-fallout-soon-to-follow/[/quote]

[quote=Anonymous]Are you actually comparing lacrosse to SEC football? There is zero comparison. Lacrosse is not a revenue sport for a college. In fact, usually the opposite. SEC football is a huge revenue maker for their colleges and frankly, for their towns. 90K+ attendees at most games. Top head coaches earn multi-millions. Many SEC schools have NFL level facilities and players travel by private plane. Many SEC football players enter the NFL draft and go on to play professionally. There isn’t anything remotely close in lacrosse. Professional lacrosse for both men and women’s teams can’t even make a profit and struggle for spectators. College lacrosse although growing will never rival college football…especially in the SEC!

Not comparing them at all. This information about the new SEC benefits was provided by the coaches to a player with an offer at Florida. Title 9 equal access an opportunity.

Happy to see Clemson picking up some commits.... Good for them, great for the sport. More great opportunities for the young women.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Happy to see Clemson picking up some commits.... Good for them, great for the sport. More great opportunities for the young women.

We all know the teams that finish in the Top 20 every year and the teams if they do not end in the Top 20 are right there....

What programs are on the rise? What program has the best chance to become a perennial Top 20 Team? Can Clemson get there quickly?

IMHO, Denver, Arizona State, Colorado, Dartmouth, Michigan, Rutgers and possibly Clemson have the best chance.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Happy to see Clemson picking up some commits.... Good for them, great for the sport. More great opportunities for the young women.

Hopefully the performance of their football team doesn't hut the recruiting. Can't imagine going on an official visit there and watching them loose when that is the biggest draw of the school!

This year is interesting but mostly more of the same. UNC will clearly be the best team again (yes I realize they lost to BC in the semis) followed more closely this season by BC . Cuse will round out the top 3 and then there is a bit of a gap in which you can insert multiple teams in no particular order such as NW, Duke, Princeton, MD, UVA, Loyolla, ND . The ACC will be the dominant conference again The interesting thing is I think UNC takes a small step back to the pack ,more so on the defensive side while I think BC may be a little better than they were last year overall. I think Stanford could take a step forward but they need to play some better out of conference games . I think SBU takes a big step backwards even with the best coach in the NCAA.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This year is interesting but mostly more of the same. UNC will clearly be the best team again (yes I realize they lost to BC in the semis) followed more closely this season by BC . Cuse will round out the top 3 and then there is a bit of a gap in which you can insert multiple teams in no particular order such as NW, Duke, Princeton, MD, UVA, Loyolla, ND . The ACC will be the dominant conference again The interesting thing is I think UNC takes a small step back to the pack ,more so on the defensive side while I think BC may be a little better than they were last year overall. I think Stanford could take a step forward but they need to play some better out of conference games . I think SBU takes a big step backwards even with the best coach in the NCAA.

Don’t think Syracuse is a lock to be top 3 or in the Final Four. Loyola a notch below the other teams mentioned. Agree Northwestern, Princeton, Virginia, Maryland Duke, ND will fight it out to get in the Final Four along with Syracuse. Tournament Seeding will be critical, don’t want to have to play BC or UNC before The Final Four. Any other contenders or teams that can surprise? Michigan? Denver? USC? Rutgers?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Happy to see Clemson picking up some commits.... Good for them, great for the sport. More great opportunities for the young women.

Hopefully the performance of their football team doesn't hut the recruiting. Can't imagine going on an official visit there and watching them loose when that is the biggest draw of the school!

Hopefully you don't pass you nasty attitude down to your kids. Can't imagine going through life as you.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This year is interesting but mostly more of the same. UNC will clearly be the best team again (yes I realize they lost to BC in the semis) followed more closely this season by BC . Cuse will round out the top 3 and then there is a bit of a gap in which you can insert multiple teams in no particular order such as NW, Duke, Princeton, MD, UVA, Loyolla, ND . The ACC will be the dominant conference again The interesting thing is I think UNC takes a small step back to the pack ,more so on the defensive side while I think BC may be a little better than they were last year overall. I think Stanford could take a step forward but they need to play some better out of conference games . I think SBU takes a big step backwards even with the best coach in the NCAA.

Don’t think Syracuse is a lock to be top 3 or in the Final Four. Loyola a notch below the other teams mentioned. Agree Northwestern, Princeton, Virginia, Maryland Duke, ND will fight it out to get in the Final Four along with Syracuse. Tournament Seeding will be critical, don’t want to have to play BC or UNC before The Final Four. Any other contenders or teams that can surprise? Michigan? Denver? USC? Rutgers?

Florida?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This year is interesting but mostly more of the same. UNC will clearly be the best team again (yes I realize they lost to BC in the semis) followed more closely this season by BC . Cuse will round out the top 3 and then there is a bit of a gap in which you can insert multiple teams in no particular order such as NW, Duke, Princeton, MD, UVA, Loyolla, ND . The ACC will be the dominant conference again The interesting thing is I think UNC takes a small step back to the pack ,more so on the defensive side while I think BC may be a little better than they were last year overall. I think Stanford could take a step forward but they need to play some better out of conference games . I think SBU takes a big step backwards even with the best coach in the NCAA.

Don’t think Syracuse is a lock to be top 3 or in the Final Four. Loyola a notch below the other teams mentioned. Agree Northwestern, Princeton, Virginia, Maryland Duke, ND will fight it out to get in the Final Four along with Syracuse. Tournament Seeding will be critical, don’t want to have to play BC or UNC before The Final Four. Any other contenders or teams that can surprise? Michigan? Denver? USC? Rutgers?

Florida?

Duke, Virginia, Rutgers, Michigan,Rutgers, USC, Denver, Princeton are NOT getting into the final four! No chance!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This year is interesting but mostly more of the same. UNC will clearly be the best team again (yes I realize they lost to BC in the semis) followed more closely this season by BC . Cuse will round out the top 3 and then there is a bit of a gap in which you can insert multiple teams in no particular order such as NW, Duke, Princeton, MD, UVA, Loyolla, ND . The ACC will be the dominant conference again The interesting thing is I think UNC takes a small step back to the pack ,more so on the defensive side while I think BC may be a little better than they were last year overall. I think Stanford could take a step forward but they need to play some better out of conference games . I think SBU takes a big step backwards even with the best coach in the NCAA.

Don’t think Syracuse is a lock to be top 3 or in the Final Four. Loyola a notch below the other teams mentioned. Agree Northwestern, Princeton, Virginia, Maryland Duke, ND will fight it out to get in the Final Four along with Syracuse. Tournament Seeding will be critical, don’t want to have to play BC or UNC before The Final Four. Any other contenders or teams that can surprise? Michigan? Denver? USC? Rutgers?

Florida?

Duke, Virginia, Rutgers, Michigan,Rutgers, USC, Denver, Princeton are NOT getting into the final four! No chance!

Thanks for clearing that up.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This year is interesting but mostly more of the same. UNC will clearly be the best team again (yes I realize they lost to BC in the semis) followed more closely this season by BC . Cuse will round out the top 3 and then there is a bit of a gap in which you can insert multiple teams in no particular order such as NW, Duke, Princeton, MD, UVA, Loyolla, ND . The ACC will be the dominant conference again The interesting thing is I think UNC takes a small step back to the pack ,more so on the defensive side while I think BC may be a little better than they were last year overall. I think Stanford could take a step forward but they need to play some better out of conference games . I think SBU takes a big step backwards even with the best coach in the NCAA.

Don’t think Syracuse is a lock to be top 3 or in the Final Four. Loyola a notch below the other teams mentioned. Agree Northwestern, Princeton, Virginia, Maryland Duke, ND will fight it out to get in the Final Four along with Syracuse. Tournament Seeding will be critical, don’t want to have to play BC or UNC before The Final Four. Any other contenders or teams that can surprise? Michigan? Denver? USC? Rutgers?

Florida?

Jacksonville may be the new top contender out of Florida!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This year is interesting but mostly more of the same. UNC will clearly be the best team again (yes I realize they lost to BC in the semis) followed more closely this season by BC . Cuse will round out the top 3 and then there is a bit of a gap in which you can insert multiple teams in no particular order such as NW, Duke, Princeton, MD, UVA, Loyolla, ND . The ACC will be the dominant conference again The interesting thing is I think UNC takes a small step back to the pack ,more so on the defensive side while I think BC may be a little better than they were last year overall. I think Stanford could take a step forward but they need to play some better out of conference games . I think SBU takes a big step backwards even with the best coach in the NCAA.

Don’t think Syracuse is a lock to be top 3 or in the Final Four. Loyola a notch below the other teams mentioned. Agree Northwestern, Princeton, Virginia, Maryland Duke, ND will fight it out to get in the Final Four along with Syracuse. Tournament Seeding will be critical, don’t want to have to play BC or UNC before The Final Four. Any other contenders or teams that can surprise? Michigan? Denver? USC? Rutgers?

Florida?

Duke, Virginia, Rutgers, Michigan,Rutgers, USC, Denver, Princeton are NOT getting into the final four! No chance!

I bet that you would have given JMU no chance back in 2018. Only time will tel, that's why they play the games... Pretty sure I read on here last year that no one was going to beat Carolina...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This year is interesting but mostly more of the same. UNC will clearly be the best team again (yes I realize they lost to BC in the semis) followed more closely this season by BC . Cuse will round out the top 3 and then there is a bit of a gap in which you can insert multiple teams in no particular order such as NW, Duke, Princeton, MD, UVA, Loyolla, ND . The ACC will be the dominant conference again The interesting thing is I think UNC takes a small step back to the pack ,more so on the defensive side while I think BC may be a little better than they were last year overall. I think Stanford could take a step forward but they need to play some better out of conference games . I think SBU takes a big step backwards even with the best coach in the NCAA.

Don’t think Syracuse is a lock to be top 3 or in the Final Four. Loyola a notch below the other teams mentioned. Agree Northwestern, Princeton, Virginia, Maryland Duke, ND will fight it out to get in the Final Four along with Syracuse. Tournament Seeding will be critical, don’t want to have to play BC or UNC before The Final Four. Any other contenders or teams that can surprise? Michigan? Denver? USC? Rutgers?

Florida?

Duke, Virginia, Rutgers, Michigan,Rutgers, USC, Denver, Princeton are NOT getting into the final four! No chance!

Duke , Virginia & Princeton all have legitimate chance to get to the Final Four. As good of a chance as Syracuse, Maryland Northwestern and ND.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This year is interesting but mostly more of the same. UNC will clearly be the best team again (yes I realize they lost to BC in the semis) followed more closely this season by BC . Cuse will round out the top 3 and then there is a bit of a gap in which you can insert multiple teams in no particular order such as NW, Duke, Princeton, MD, UVA, Loyolla, ND . The ACC will be the dominant conference again The interesting thing is I think UNC takes a small step back to the pack ,more so on the defensive side while I think BC may be a little better than they were last year overall. I think Stanford could take a step forward but they need to play some better out of conference games . I think SBU takes a big step backwards even with the best coach in the NCAA.

Don’t think Syracuse is a lock to be top 3 or in the Final Four. Loyola a notch below the other teams mentioned. Agree Northwestern, Princeton, Virginia, Maryland Duke, ND will fight it out to get in the Final Four along with Syracuse. Tournament Seeding will be critical, don’t want to have to play BC or UNC before The Final Four. Any other contenders or teams that can surprise? Michigan? Denver? USC? Rutgers?

Florida?

Florida will not make it to the final 4. There is something about that program that they will not get over the hump. maybe its the coach or the culture of the program.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This year is interesting but mostly more of the same. UNC will clearly be the best team again (yes I realize they lost to BC in the semis) followed more closely this season by BC . Cuse will round out the top 3 and then there is a bit of a gap in which you can insert multiple teams in no particular order such as NW, Duke, Princeton, MD, UVA, Loyolla, ND . The ACC will be the dominant conference again The interesting thing is I think UNC takes a small step back to the pack ,more so on the defensive side while I think BC may be a little better than they were last year overall. I think Stanford could take a step forward but they need to play some better out of conference games . I think SBU takes a big step backwards even with the best coach in the NCAA.

Don’t think Syracuse is a lock to be top 3 or in the Final Four. Loyola a notch below the other teams mentioned. Agree Northwestern, Princeton, Virginia, Maryland Duke, ND will fight it out to get in the Final Four along with Syracuse. Tournament Seeding will be critical, don’t want to have to play BC or UNC before The Final Four. Any other contenders or teams that can surprise? Michigan? Denver? USC? Rutgers?

Florida?

Duke, Virginia, Rutgers, Michigan,Rutgers, USC, Denver, Princeton are NOT getting into the final four! No chance!

Duke , Virginia & Princeton all have legitimate chance to get to the Final Four. As good of a chance as Syracuse, Maryland Northwestern and ND.

Totally disagree. They would be lucky to finish 5-10. Not in same league, but don
t take my my word for it, see what happens when they play the games. Big drop off after UNC,NW,BC,Cuse

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This year is interesting but mostly more of the same. UNC will clearly be the best team again (yes I realize they lost to BC in the semis) followed more closely this season by BC . Cuse will round out the top 3 and then there is a bit of a gap in which you can insert multiple teams in no particular order such as NW, Duke, Princeton, MD, UVA, Loyolla, ND . The ACC will be the dominant conference again The interesting thing is I think UNC takes a small step back to the pack ,more so on the defensive side while I think BC may be a little better than they were last year overall. I think Stanford could take a step forward but they need to play some better out of conference games . I think SBU takes a big step backwards even with the best coach in the NCAA.

Don’t think Syracuse is a lock to be top 3 or in the Final Four. Loyola a notch below the other teams mentioned. Agree Northwestern, Princeton, Virginia, Maryland Duke, ND will fight it out to get in the Final Four along with Syracuse. Tournament Seeding will be critical, don’t want to have to play BC or UNC before The Final Four. Any other contenders or teams that can surprise? Michigan? Denver? USC? Rutgers?

Florida?

Duke, Virginia, Rutgers, Michigan,Rutgers, USC, Denver, Princeton are NOT getting into the final four! No chance!

Duke , Virginia & Princeton all have legitimate chance to get to the Final Four. As good of a chance as Syracuse, Maryland Northwestern and ND.

Wow, way off.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This year is interesting but mostly more of the same. UNC will clearly be the best team again (yes I realize they lost to BC in the semis) followed more closely this season by BC . Cuse will round out the top 3 and then there is a bit of a gap in which you can insert multiple teams in no particular order such as NW, Duke, Princeton, MD, UVA, Loyolla, ND . The ACC will be the dominant conference again The interesting thing is I think UNC takes a small step back to the pack ,more so on the defensive side while I think BC may be a little better than they were last year overall. I think Stanford could take a step forward but they need to play some better out of conference games . I think SBU takes a big step backwards even with the best coach in the NCAA.

Don’t think Syracuse is a lock to be top 3 or in the Final Four. Loyola a notch below the other teams mentioned. Agree Northwestern, Princeton, Virginia, Maryland Duke, ND will fight it out to get in the Final Four along with Syracuse. Tournament Seeding will be critical, don’t want to have to play BC or UNC before The Final Four. Any other contenders or teams that can surprise? Michigan? Denver? USC? Rutgers?

Florida?

Duke, Virginia, Rutgers, Michigan,Rutgers, USC, Denver, Princeton are NOT getting into the final four! No chance!

Duke , Virginia & Princeton all have legitimate chance to get to the Final Four. As good of a chance as Syracuse, Maryland Northwestern and ND.

Totally disagree. They would be lucky to finish 5-10. Not in same league, but don
t take my my word for it, see what happens when they play the games. Big drop off after UNC,NW,BC,Cuse

Pretty much hear the same song every year.... Big drop off after the top 4 (Pick 4 traditional powers) it is generally stated by a parent who has a daughter at one of the schools that they pick.

The reality tells a different story. Just looking at the past 5 years (minus 2020)

2021 BC won the Championship, they were ranked 12th in the pre-season poll.

2019 MD won the Championship, they were ranked 2nd in the pre-season poll.

2018 JMU won the Championship, they were ranked 16th in the preseason poll.

2017 MD won the Championship, they were ranked 2nd in the preseason poll.

2017, one of the pre-season Top 4 made it to the Final Four.

2018, two of the pre-season Top 4 made it two the Final Four.

2019, three of the pre-season Top 4 made it to the Final Four.

2021, two of the pre-season Top 4 made it to the Final Four.

on average 50% of the pre-season Top 4 actually make it to the Final Four.

During that time period there have been several close competitive games decided by 2 or less goals in the Quarter Finals which also indicates the drop is not so significant. It could be argued that in many cases a 3, 4 or even a 5 goal game is competitive and there is not that big of a difference between the teams.

Although I would agree there is not a lot of parity across the board in women's lacrosse, there does seem to be a bit of parity among the perennial top 10 - 15 programs from year to year. What is the saying? "Any given day..." I guess that is why they play the games.

Only time will tell, looking forward to watching some great games.

All Lax101 interesting connection between two.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

All Lax101 interesting connection between two.

Is there a point to this post?

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

Who did they play last week?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

The beat Temple who finished top 20.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Not knocking Drexel but they beat 1 Top 20 team (Temple #19) in an odd season that for all intents and purpose did not have Maryland, Northwestern, Hopkins, Penn State, Princeton or Penn playing .... All of which are usually Top 10 - 20.
We will see how they do this year with things back to normal.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Not knocking Drexel but they beat 1 Top 20 team (Temple #19) in an odd season that for all intents and purpose did not have Maryland, Northwestern, Hopkins, Penn State, Princeton or Penn playing .... All of which are usually Top 10 - 20.
We will see how they do this year with things back to normal.

Huh? Obviously ivies did not play, but NU made the final four. Sorry but Maryland and Penn State just weren't all that in 2020 and 2021, with or without covid. No one was saying Drexel would be top ten, just acknowledging they were a good team last season and well could be again this season. The only ranked teams Florida beat last season are Temple, Jacksonville and Louisville. The only ranked teams Loyola beat are Drexel and Hofstra. Were they also only ranked because things weren't normal? Don't know how Drexel will do this year, but you're implying they were only successful because it wasn't a normal year which seems unfair. Give teams credit when it's due, even if it's not an ACC or Big Ten team.

Drexel coaching staff left and is now at Villanova

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Not knocking Drexel but they beat 1 Top 20 team (Temple #19) in an odd season that for all intents and purpose did not have Maryland, Northwestern, Hopkins, Penn State, Princeton or Penn playing .... All of which are usually Top 10 - 20.
We will see how they do this year with things back to normal.

Huh? Obviously ivies did not play, but NU made the final four. Sorry but Maryland and Penn State just weren't all that in 2020 and 2021, with or without covid. No one was saying Drexel would be top ten, just acknowledging they were a good team last season and well could be again this season. The only ranked teams Florida beat last season are Temple, Jacksonville and Louisville. The only ranked teams Loyola beat are Drexel and Hofstra. Were they also only ranked because things weren't normal? Don't know how Drexel will do this year, but you're implying they were only successful because it wasn't a normal year which seems unfair. Give teams credit when it's due, even if it's not an ACC or Big Ten team.

Maryland finished the season ranked 9 and Penn State beat Maryland 2x… The point is there were six teams who are in the top 20 just about every year (Hopkins if not in just outside) throw in Dartmouth as well not playing any crossover games so it was not a normal year. If they were playing crossover games pretty sure the Top 20 would have looked a little different.
In a normal year you have to have quality wins in order to get an at large bid and SOS counts as well. I watched Drexel 3x they looked good but at the end of the day you have to beat good teams….

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Not knocking Drexel but they beat 1 Top 20 team (Temple #19) in an odd season that for all intents and purpose did not have Maryland, Northwestern, Hopkins, Penn State, Princeton or Penn playing .... All of which are usually Top 10 - 20.
We will see how they do this year with things back to normal.

Huh? Obviously ivies did not play, but NU made the final four. Sorry but Maryland and Penn State just weren't all that in 2020 and 2021, with or without covid. No one was saying Drexel would be top ten, just acknowledging they were a good team last season and well could be again this season. The only ranked teams Florida beat last season are Temple, Jacksonville and Louisville. The only ranked teams Loyola beat are Drexel and Hofstra. Were they also only ranked because things weren't normal? Don't know how Drexel will do this year, but you're implying they were only successful because it wasn't a normal year which seems unfair. Give teams credit when it's due, even if it's not an ACC or Big Ten team.

BC wasn’t all that in 2020 …. Can’t look at a season that was canceled and draw any conclusions because you don’t know how things would have turned out. Your reference is simply dopey.

Drexel had a great year last but what is with the change in coaches this year?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Not knocking Drexel but they beat 1 Top 20 team (Temple #19) in an odd season that for all intents and purpose did not have Maryland, Northwestern, Hopkins, Penn State, Princeton or Penn playing .... All of which are usually Top 10 - 20.
We will see how they do this year with things back to normal.

Huh? Obviously ivies did not play, but NU made the final four. Sorry but Maryland and Penn State just weren't all that in 2020 and 2021, with or without covid. No one was saying Drexel would be top ten, just acknowledging they were a good team last season and well could be again this season. The only ranked teams Florida beat last season are Temple, Jacksonville and Louisville. The only ranked teams Loyola beat are Drexel and Hofstra. Were they also only ranked because things weren't normal? Don't know how Drexel will do this year, but you're implying they were only successful because it wasn't a normal year which seems unfair. Give teams credit when it's due, even if it's not an ACC or Big Ten team.

Why did Drexel hire a new coach

Originally Posted by Anonymous

This year is interesting but mostly more of the same. UNC will clearly be the best team again (yes I realize they lost to BC in the semis) followed more closely this season by BC . Cuse will round out the top 3 and then there is a bit of a gap in which you can insert multiple teams in no particular order such as NW, Duke, Princeton, MD, UVA, Loyolla, ND . The ACC will be the dominant conference again The interesting thing is I think UNC takes a small step back to the pack ,more so on the defensive side while I think BC may be a little better than they were last year overall. I think Stanford could take a step forward but they need to play some better out of conference games . I think SBU takes a big step backwards even with the best coach in the NCAA.

Don’t think Syracuse is a lock to be top 3 or in the Final Four. Loyola a notch below the other teams mentioned. Agree Northwestern, Princeton, Virginia, Maryland Duke, ND will fight it out to get in the Final Four along with Syracuse. Tournament Seeding will be critical, don’t want to have to play BC or UNC before The Final Four. Any other contenders or teams that can surprise? Michigan? Denver? USC? Rutgers?

Florida?

Duke, Virginia, Rutgers, Michigan,Rutgers, USC, Denver, Princeton are NOT getting into the final four! No chance!

Duke , Virginia & Princeton all have legitimate chance to get to the Final Four. As good of a chance as Syracuse, Maryland Northwestern and ND.

Wow, way off.

Such an ignorant post , everyone keeps hyping NW who would be middle of the road in the ACC . Tell us the teams who have a better chance at making the final four other than those named if it is so far off

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Can people just stop with the “ they played them closer than another team so they must be better “. Not picking on JMU but playing UNC closer than most ACC teams does not make them better than most ACC teams .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Can people just stop with the “ they played them closer than another team so they must be better “. Not picking on JMU but playing UNC closer than most ACC teams does not make them better than most ACC teams .

JMU is a very good program, they are consistently Top 20 and have been for many years. If they were in the ACC they would be middle to bottom… that is not a knock it is what it is. Oh, and BTW… JMU has won a National Championship which is more tha most ACC Teams including ND, Syracuse, Duke, Louisville and Virginia Tech can say.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel coaching staff left and is now at Villanova

Drexel lost an excellent coach. The new coach has had a pretty good mentor for the past 5 or 6 years I believe.
IMHO the new coach will do a great job. Drexel is a good school with a lot to offer and I hope they can build on the success they had last year s it is good for the sport.
I am not ready to put them as a perineal Top 20 but they are a good program, certainly one on the rise.

Excellent opportunity for any student athlete who wants to embrace it, Drexel would be a great fit for a lot of kids.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Not knocking Drexel but they beat 1 Top 20 team (Temple #19) in an odd season that for all intents and purpose did not have Maryland, Northwestern, Hopkins, Penn State, Princeton or Penn playing .... All of which are usually Top 10 - 20.
We will see how they do this year with things back to normal.

Huh? Obviously ivies did not play, but NU made the final four. Sorry but Maryland and Penn State just weren't all that in 2020 and 2021, with or without covid. No one was saying Drexel would be top ten, just acknowledging they were a good team last season and well could be again this season. The only ranked teams Florida beat last season are Temple, Jacksonville and Louisville. The only ranked teams Loyola beat are Drexel and Hofstra. Were they also only ranked because things weren't normal? Don't know how Drexel will do this year, but you're implying they were only successful because it wasn't a normal year which seems unfair. Give teams credit when it's due, even if it's not an ACC or Big Ten team.

BC wasn’t all that in 2020 …. Can’t look at a season that was canceled and draw any conclusions because you don’t know how things would have turned out. Your reference is simply dopey.

The point is that Big 10 was not off to a great start in 2020, even NU actually, so it can be inferred from partial 2020 and completed 2021 results that the big 10 is (was?-we'll see) a little down. Like BC, NU rebounded in 2021 and made it to the final four in spite of covid, which is being used as an excuse for certain teams not performing as well in 2021 when most programs were impacted by covid. Let's not forget, though, that NU was beat handily in the final four. Maryland still finished in the top 10, and Rutgers and Hopkins top 20. A previous post implied lesser teams ended up ranked because of big 10/ivies not playing "for all intents and purposes" but it's really just a couple of ivies missing that opened up spots for other teams to move into the rankings. Getting back to the original conversation, Drexel was ranked because they were good, not because of all the ivies and big 10 teams missing from the rankings.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Not knocking Drexel but they beat 1 Top 20 team (Temple #19) in an odd season that for all intents and purpose did not have Maryland, Northwestern, Hopkins, Penn State, Princeton or Penn playing .... All of which are usually Top 10 - 20.
We will see how they do this year with things back to normal.

Huh? Obviously ivies did not play, but NU made the final four. Sorry but Maryland and Penn State just weren't all that in 2020 and 2021, with or without covid. No one was saying Drexel would be top ten, just acknowledging they were a good team last season and well could be again this season. The only ranked teams Florida beat last season are Temple, Jacksonville and Louisville. The only ranked teams Loyola beat are Drexel and Hofstra. Were they also only ranked because things weren't normal? Don't know how Drexel will do this year, but you're implying they were only successful because it wasn't a normal year which seems unfair. Give teams credit when it's due, even if it's not an ACC or Big Ten team.

BC wasn’t all that in 2020 …. Can’t look at a season that was canceled and draw any conclusions because you don’t know how things would have turned out. Your reference is simply dopey.

The point is that Big 10 was not off to a great start in 2020, even NU actually, so it can be inferred from partial 2020 and completed 2021 results that the big 10 is (was?-we'll see) a little down. Like BC, NU rebounded in 2021 and made it to the final four in spite of covid, which is being used as an excuse for certain teams not performing as well in 2021 when most programs were impacted by covid. Let's not forget, though, that NU was beat handily in the final four. Maryland still finished in the top 10, and Rutgers and Hopkins top 20. A previous post implied lesser teams ended up ranked because of big 10/ivies not playing "for all intents and purposes" but it's really just a couple of ivies missing that opened up spots for other teams to move into the rankings. Getting back to the original conversation, Drexel was ranked because they were good, not because of all the ivies and big 10 teams missing from the rankings.

Learn to comprehend…. Nobody used Covid as an excuse. Big 10 teams did not compete outside their own conference so there was no chance for out of conference games which impacted the rankings and RPI. The Ivy’s didn’t play at all (except for 2 games I believe) which also impacted the rankings as well RPI.
2020 was cut short, it’s not an excuse it’s a fact. You can not infer anything because you have no idea what would have happened if the season played out. BC was off to a bad start losing to UMASS and USC, by your logic we should infer that 2021 should have been a down year…
2021 rankings and final poll are what they are but there will always be an asterisk because it was not a normal season. Put an asterisk next to 2021 as well for the regular season .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel coaching staff left and is now at Villanova

Drexel lost an excellent coach. The new coach has had a pretty good mentor for the past 5 or 6 years I believe.
IMHO the new coach will do a great job. Drexel is a good school with a lot to offer and I hope they can build on the success they had last year s it is good for the sport.
I am not ready to put them as a perineal Top 20 but they are a good program, certainly one on the rise.

Excellent opportunity for any student athlete who wants to
embrace it, Drexel would be a great fit for a lot of kids.

Best thing about is it is connected to UPenn so the kids can learn by osmosis

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel coaching staff left and is now at Villanova

Drexel lost an excellent coach. The new coach has had a pretty good mentor for the past 5 or 6 years I believe.
IMHO the new coach will do a great job. Drexel is a good school with a lot to offer and I hope they can build on the success they had last year s it is good for the sport.
I am not ready to put them as a perineal Top 20 but they are a good program, certainly one on the rise.

Excellent opportunity for any student athlete who wants to
embrace it, Drexel would be a great fit for a lot of kids.

Best thing about is it is connected to UPenn so the kids can learn by osmosis

Wow, how creative.... I'm guessing that you did not attend Penn. Troll.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel coaching staff left and is now at Villanova

Drexel lost an excellent coach. The new coach has had a pretty good mentor for the past 5 or 6 years I believe.
IMHO the new coach will do a great job. Drexel is a good school with a lot to offer and I hope they can build on the success they had last year s it is good for the sport.
I am not ready to put them as a perineal Top 20 but they are a good program, certainly one on the rise.

Excellent opportunity for any student athlete who wants to
embrace it, Drexel would be a great fit for a lot of kids.

Best thing about is it is connected to UPenn so the kids can learn by osmosis

Funny. Drexel a great school! As is Penn of course. University City in Philly is happening these days. Such a change from years ago.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel coaching staff left and is now at Villanova

Drexel lost an excellent coach. The new coach has had a pretty good mentor for the past 5 or 6 years I believe.
IMHO the new coach will do a great job. Drexel is a good school with a lot to offer and I hope they can build on the success they had last year s it is good for the sport.
I am not ready to put them as a perineal Top 20 but they are a good program, certainly one on the rise.

Excellent opportunity for any student athlete who wants to
embrace it, Drexel would be a great fit for a lot of kids.

Best thing about is it is connected to UPenn so the kids can learn by osmosis

Funny. Drexel a great school! As is Penn of course. University City in Philly is happening these days. Such a change from years ago.

it is. was just at Drexel this weekend with the daughter. the area is so much nicer than it used to be. up and coming program

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Can people just stop with the “ they played them closer than another team so they must be better “. Not picking on JMU but playing UNC closer than most ACC teams does not make them better than most ACC teams .

Since 2015 JMU is 12-12 vs ACC teams, They beat VT 6x, UNC 2x, UVA 2x, BC 1x and Louisville 1x. JMU would fall right in the middle of the ACC.

“Learn to comprehend…. Nobody used Covid as an excuse. Big 10 teams did not compete outside their own conference so there was no chance for out of conference games which impacted the rankings and RPI. The Ivy’s didn’t play at all (except for 2 games I believe) which also impacted the rankings as well RPI.
2020 was cut short, it’s not an excuse it’s a fact. You can not infer anything because you have no idea what would have happened if the season played out. BC was off to a bad start losing to UMASS and USC, by your logic we should infer that 2021 should have been a down year…
2021 rankings and final poll are what they are but there will always be an asterisk because it was not a normal season. Put an asterisk next to 2021 as well for the regular season .”

Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Can people just stop with the “ they played them closer than another team so they must be better “. Not picking on JMU but playing UNC closer than most ACC teams does not make them better than most ACC teams .

Since 2015 JMU is 12-12 vs ACC teams, They beat VT 6x, UNC 2x, UVA 2x, BC 1x and Louisville 1x. JMU would fall right in the middle of the ACC.

Didn’t JMU win a National Championship. That’s more than Notre Dame, Duke, Syracuse, Virginia Tech or Louisville can say. JMU consistently finish the season ranked in the top 20 I wouldn’t put them up there with UNC & BC but the have proven that they are an excellent program who can compete with the best.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Can people just stop with the “ they played them closer than another team so they must be better “. Not picking on JMU but playing UNC closer than most ACC teams does not make them better than most ACC teams .

It's a deal but only if people can also stop saying "they play in the ACC so they must be better" even though they haven't beaten UNC in over 5 years...or ever.

ACC ….. bla bla bla….

I don’t think anyone denies that The ACC is the deepest conference but let’s be honest, all ACC Programs are not equal. There are a number of programs that could compete in the ACC and do as well as most ACC teams do.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel looked very good last week in their fall ball play. Led by Hillier don't underestimate them.

Fear The Dragons!

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Can people just stop with the “ they played them closer than another team so they must be better “. Not picking on JMU but playing UNC closer than most ACC teams does not make them better than most ACC teams .

It's a deal but only if people can also stop saying "they play in the ACC so they must be better" even though they haven't beaten UNC in over 5 years...or ever.

But they almost did. Doesn't that count?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Learn to comprehend…. Nobody used Covid as an excuse. Big 10 teams did not compete outside their own conference so there was no chance for out of conference games which impacted the rankings and RPI. The Ivy’s didn’t play at all (except for 2 games I believe) which also impacted the rankings as well RPI.
2020 was cut short, it’s not an excuse it’s a fact. You can not infer anything because you have no idea what would have happened if the season played out. BC was off to a bad start losing to UMASS and USC, by your logic we should infer that 2021 should have been a down year…
2021 rankings and final poll are what they are but there will always be an asterisk because it was not a normal season. Put an asterisk next to 2021 as well for the regular season .”

Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament

Apparently the selection committee cares very much about RPI.... The asterisk will always be associated with both 2020 & 2021, they were not normal years.

There absolutely were teams not competing as "normal" that would have impacted the tournament. The entire make up of the tournament and seeding would have likely been very different if it were a normal season. It is what it is but to say that it was normal or that nothing would have been different and that nothing would have been impacted is simply ignorant.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Learn to comprehend…. Nobody used Covid as an excuse. Big 10 teams did not compete outside their own conference so there was no chance for out of conference games which impacted the rankings and RPI. The Ivy’s didn’t play at all (except for 2 games I believe) which also impacted the rankings as well RPI.
2020 was cut short, it’s not an excuse it’s a fact. You can not infer anything because you have no idea what would have happened if the season played out. BC was off to a bad start losing to UMASS and USC, by your logic we should infer that 2021 should have been a down year…
2021 rankings and final poll are what they are but there will always be an asterisk because it was not a normal season. Put an asterisk next to 2021 as well for the regular season .”

Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament

We see that you are still having a difficult time comprehending. The season, rankings, RPI (which is used to select at large bids to the tournament) and tournament were all impacted by teams not competing (ivy’s) and other teams not playing their normal schedule. Everything was impacted.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Learn to comprehend…. Nobody used Covid as an excuse. Big 10 teams did not compete outside their own conference so there was no chance for out of conference games which impacted the rankings and RPI. The Ivy’s didn’t play at all (except for 2 games I believe) which also impacted the rankings as well RPI.
2020 was cut short, it’s not an excuse it’s a fact. You can not infer anything because you have no idea what would have happened if the season played out. BC was off to a bad start losing to UMASS and USC, by your logic we should infer that 2021 should have been a down year…
2021 rankings and final poll are what they are but there will always be an asterisk because it was not a normal season. Put an asterisk next to 2021 as well for the regular season .”

Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament

Apparently the selection committee cares very much about RPI.... The asterisk will always be associated with both 2020 & 2021, they were not normal years.

There absolutely were teams not competing as "normal" that would have impacted the tournament. The entire make up of the tournament and seeding would have likely been very different if it were a normal season. It is what it is but to say that it was normal or that nothing would have been different and that nothing would have been impacted is simply ignorant.

--- "Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament." ---

The above is an ignorant statement, obviously things would have been different and the tournament would have been impacted had the season had been normal.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The Dragons looked okay last year but they really didn't have a very difficult schedule. They didn't beat any Top 20 Teams, what is their schedule like for this year?

I would expect Drexel to look really good against Binghamton, Lasalle and Marist - assuming that's who they played, going off Inside Lacrosse fall ball article. Drexel was a good team last year with several players returning this year. Last season they beat Towson 3x, Hofstra and Temple, who all finished ranked in coaches poll and ranked/RV in media poll. They also almost beat JMU who ended the season easily beating a ranked Hopkins team in Round 1 and hung with UNC in Round 2 as well or better than majority of most ACC teams did last season. I have no ties to Drexel or new coaching staff, but would definitely not underestimate them this season. Their ranking in the polls is earned.

Can people just stop with the “ they played them closer than another team so they must be better “. Not picking on JMU but playing UNC closer than most ACC teams does not make them better than most ACC teams .

It's a deal but only if people can also stop saying "they play in the ACC so they must be better" even though they haven't beaten UNC in over 5 years...or ever.

But they almost did. Doesn't that count?

Absolutely, it counts the same as when a non-ACC team does it. Why is applying the same standard to teams from every conference so difficult for some of you? This is not complicated. Pretty much every year the four best teams in the country are the ones that make it to the final four, even this past season with impact of covid - no excuses, no asterisks required.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Learn to comprehend…. Nobody used Covid as an excuse. Big 10 teams did not compete outside their own conference so there was no chance for out of conference games which impacted the rankings and RPI. The Ivy’s didn’t play at all (except for 2 games I believe) which also impacted the rankings as well RPI.
2020 was cut short, it’s not an excuse it’s a fact. You can not infer anything because you have no idea what would have happened if the season played out. BC was off to a bad start losing to UMASS and USC, by your logic we should infer that 2021 should have been a down year…
2021 rankings and final poll are what they are but there will always be an asterisk because it was not a normal season. Put an asterisk next to 2021 as well for the regular season .”

Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament

Apparently the selection committee cares very much about RPI.... The asterisk will always be associated with both 2020 & 2021, they were not normal years.

There absolutely were teams not competing as "normal" that would have impacted the tournament. The entire make up of the tournament and seeding would have likely been very different if it were a normal season. It is what it is but to say that it was normal or that nothing would have been different and that nothing would have been impacted is simply ignorant.

--- "Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament." ---

The above is an ignorant statement, obviously things would have been different and the tournament would have been impacted had the season had been normal.

And its not just the Ivies... good chance the Big 10 would have been exposed for being weaker than some people think, were they to play out of conference... will be interesting to see how they measure up this year...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Learn to comprehend…. Nobody used Covid as an excuse. Big 10 teams did not compete outside their own conference so there was no chance for out of conference games which impacted the rankings and RPI. The Ivy’s didn’t play at all (except for 2 games I believe) which also impacted the rankings as well RPI.
2020 was cut short, it’s not an excuse it’s a fact. You can not infer anything because you have no idea what would have happened if the season played out. BC was off to a bad start losing to UMASS and USC, by your logic we should infer that 2021 should have been a down year…
2021 rankings and final poll are what they are but there will always be an asterisk because it was not a normal season. Put an asterisk next to 2021 as well for the regular season .”

Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament

Apparently the selection committee cares very much about RPI.... The asterisk will always be associated with both 2020 & 2021, they were not normal years.

There absolutely were teams not competing as "normal" that would have impacted the tournament. The entire make up of the tournament and seeding would have likely been very different if it were a normal season. It is what it is but to say that it was normal or that nothing would have been different and that nothing would have been impacted is simply ignorant.

No year is a normal year , there are always things that make each year unique be it weather , injuries , transfers . Do you really believe that the teams who made the final four last year were not the best 4 teams in the country even if it was a “ normal “ season . All you have to do is look at the rosters to know the best four teams made the final four so no the final outcome was not impacted by COVID and placing an asterisk is idiotic , BC is a national champ even if I detest to admit it . By the way to the ACC haters from last year the ACC guy from last season was proven correct they are the dominant division in women’s lacrosse .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Learn to comprehend…. Nobody used Covid as an excuse. Big 10 teams did not compete outside their own conference so there was no chance for out of conference games which impacted the rankings and RPI. The Ivy’s didn’t play at all (except for 2 games I believe) which also impacted the rankings as well RPI.
2020 was cut short, it’s not an excuse it’s a fact. You can not infer anything because you have no idea what would have happened if the season played out. BC was off to a bad start losing to UMASS and USC, by your logic we should infer that 2021 should have been a down year…
2021 rankings and final poll are what they are but there will always be an asterisk because it was not a normal season. Put an asterisk next to 2021 as well for the regular season .”

Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament

Apparently the selection committee cares very much about RPI.... The asterisk will always be associated with both 2020 & 2021, they were not normal years.

There absolutely were teams not competing as "normal" that would have impacted the tournament. The entire make up of the tournament and seeding would have likely been very different if it were a normal season. It is what it is but to say that it was normal or that nothing would have been different and that nothing would have been impacted is simply ignorant.

--- "Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament." ---

The above is an ignorant statement, obviously things would have been different and the tournament would have been impacted had the season had been normal.

And its not just the Ivies... good chance the Big 10 would have been exposed for being weaker than some people think, were they to play out of conference... will be interesting to see how they measure up this year...

Actually, it is much more likely that the Big 10 would have been acknowledged to be stronger overall last year had they played out of conference games. Very likely that an additional 2 Big 10 Teams would have been in the tournament and most certainly 2 Ivy’s with the possibility of a 3rd Ivy. It is very likely that 4 or 5 teams that made the tournament would have been bumped in a normal year. It is also very likely that many match ups would have been different. The entire tournament would have been different.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Learn to comprehend…. Nobody used Covid as an excuse. Big 10 teams did not compete outside their own conference so there was no chance for out of conference games which impacted the rankings and RPI. The Ivy’s didn’t play at all (except for 2 games I believe) which also impacted the rankings as well RPI.
2020 was cut short, it’s not an excuse it’s a fact. You can not infer anything because you have no idea what would have happened if the season played out. BC was off to a bad start losing to UMASS and USC, by your logic we should infer that 2021 should have been a down year…
2021 rankings and final poll are what they are but there will always be an asterisk because it was not a normal season. Put an asterisk next to 2021 as well for the regular season .”

Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament

Apparently the selection committee cares very much about RPI.... The asterisk will always be associated with both 2020 & 2021, they were not normal years.

There absolutely were teams not competing as "normal" that would have impacted the tournament. The entire make up of the tournament and seeding would have likely been very different if it were a normal season. It is what it is but to say that it was normal or that nothing would have been different and that nothing would have been impacted is simply ignorant.

No year is a normal year , there are always things that make each year unique be it weather , injuries , transfers . Do you really believe that the teams who made the final four last year were not the best 4 teams in the country even if it was a “ normal “ season . All you have to do is look at the rosters to know the best four teams made the final four so no the final outcome was not impacted by COVID and placing an asterisk is idiotic , BC is a national champ even if I detest to admit it . By the way to the ACC haters from last year the ACC guy from last season was proven correct they are the dominant division in women’s lacrosse .

Apparently we have another person who struggles with reading comprehension. Nobody said anything about BC not being the national champ. The post said "Put an asterisk next to 2021 as well for the regular season.". It is not The ACC that is dominant, The Top 2 or 3 Teams in the ACC are always at the Top, right along with them are the Top 2 sometimes 3 out of the Big 10... Last year the edge went to The ACC.

Many teams can and do compete with ACC Teams, so much so that teams like Duke and Notre Dame avoid playing a competitive out of conference schedule.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Learn to comprehend…. Nobody used Covid as an excuse. Big 10 teams did not compete outside their own conference so there was no chance for out of conference games which impacted the rankings and RPI. The Ivy’s didn’t play at all (except for 2 games I believe) which also impacted the rankings as well RPI.
2020 was cut short, it’s not an excuse it’s a fact. You can not infer anything because you have no idea what would have happened if the season played out. BC was off to a bad start losing to UMASS and USC, by your logic we should infer that 2021 should have been a down year…
2021 rankings and final poll are what they are but there will always be an asterisk because it was not a normal season. Put an asterisk next to 2021 as well for the regular season .”

Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament

Apparently the selection committee cares very much about RPI.... The asterisk will always be associated with both 2020 & 2021, they were not normal years.

There absolutely were teams not competing as "normal" that would have impacted the tournament. The entire make up of the tournament and seeding would have likely been very different if it were a normal season. It is what it is but to say that it was normal or that nothing would have been different and that nothing would have been impacted is simply ignorant.

No year is a normal year , there are always things that make each year unique be it weather , injuries , transfers . Do you really believe that the teams who made the final four last year were not the best 4 teams in the country even if it was a “ normal “ season . All you have to do is look at the rosters to know the best four teams made the final four so no the final outcome was not impacted by COVID and placing an asterisk is idiotic , BC is a national champ even if I detest to admit it . By the way to the ACC haters from last year the ACC guy from last season was proven correct they are the dominant division in women’s lacrosse .

Oh, please stop with the dominant conference… Maryland is 19 - 6 vs the ACC since 2015… that’s dominant.

In addition to Maryland, I’m sure Stony Brook, Northwestern, JMU, Penn State, Princeton, Penn, and a few others would be just as competitive as the majority of ACC teams any given year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel coaching staff left and is now at Villanova

Drexel lost an excellent coach. The new coach has had a pretty good mentor for the past 5 or 6 years I believe.
IMHO the new coach will do a great job. Drexel is a good school with a lot to offer and I hope they can build on the success they had last year s it is good for the sport.
I am not ready to put them as a perineal Top 20 but they are a good program, certainly one on the rise.

Excellent opportunity for any student athlete who wants to
embrace it, Drexel would be a great fit for a lot of kids.

Best thing about is it is connected to UPenn so the kids can learn by osmosis

Funny. Drexel a great school! As is Penn of course. University City in Philly is happening these days. Such a change from years ago.

US News & World Report ranks Drexel as #103 for national universities, Penn is ranked #8....

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel coaching staff left and is now at Villanova

Drexel lost an excellent coach. The new coach has had a pretty good mentor for the past 5 or 6 years I believe.
IMHO the new coach will do a great job. Drexel is a good school with a lot to offer and I hope they can build on the success they had last year s it is good for the sport.
I am not ready to put them as a perineal Top 20 but they are a good program, certainly one on the rise.

Excellent opportunity for any student athlete who wants to
embrace it, Drexel would be a great fit for a lot of kids.

Best thing about is it is connected to UPenn so the kids can learn by osmosis

Funny. Drexel a great school! As is Penn of course. University City in Philly is happening these days. Such a change from years ago.

US News & World Report ranks Drexel as #103 for national universities, Penn is ranked #8....

I don’t recall anyone trying to compare Drexel to Penn or saying Drexel was a better school than Penn.

What is your point?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Learn to comprehend…. Nobody used Covid as an excuse. Big 10 teams did not compete outside their own conference so there was no chance for out of conference games which impacted the rankings and RPI. The Ivy’s didn’t play at all (except for 2 games I believe) which also impacted the rankings as well RPI.
2020 was cut short, it’s not an excuse it’s a fact. You can not infer anything because you have no idea what would have happened if the season played out. BC was off to a bad start losing to UMASS and USC, by your logic we should infer that 2021 should have been a down year…
2021 rankings and final poll are what they are but there will always be an asterisk because it was not a normal season. Put an asterisk next to 2021 as well for the regular season .”

Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament

Apparently the selection committee cares very much about RPI.... The asterisk will always be associated with both 2020 & 2021, they were not normal years.

There absolutely were teams not competing as "normal" that would have impacted the tournament. The entire make up of the tournament and seeding would have likely been very different if it were a normal season. It is what it is but to say that it was normal or that nothing would have been different and that nothing would have been impacted is simply ignorant.

No year is a normal year , there are always things that make each year unique be it weather , injuries , transfers . Do you really believe that the teams who made the final four last year were not the best 4 teams in the country even if it was a “ normal “ season . All you have to do is look at the rosters to know the best four teams made the final four so no the final outcome was not impacted by COVID and placing an asterisk is idiotic , BC is a national champ even if I detest to admit it . By the way to the ACC haters from last year the ACC guy from last season was proven correct they are the dominant division in women’s lacrosse .

Oh, please stop with the dominant conference… Maryland is 19 - 6 vs the ACC since 2015… that’s dominant.

In addition to Maryland, I’m sure Stony Brook, Northwestern, JMU, Penn State, Princeton, Penn, and a few others would be just as competitive as the majority of ACC teams any given year.

I am pretty sure at least 4 of those MD loses came to 1 team (UNC) so its not like the rest of the league was beating them. And if you want to see how a team like Maryland would do in the ACC, they were in there and won like 8 ACC Championships in a row.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

“Learn to comprehend…. Nobody used Covid as an excuse. Big 10 teams did not compete outside their own conference so there was no chance for out of conference games which impacted the rankings and RPI. The Ivy’s didn’t play at all (except for 2 games I believe) which also impacted the rankings as well RPI.
2020 was cut short, it’s not an excuse it’s a fact. You can not infer anything because you have no idea what would have happened if the season played out. BC was off to a bad start losing to UMASS and USC, by your logic we should infer that 2021 should have been a down year…
2021 rankings and final poll are what they are but there will always be an asterisk because it was not a normal season. Put an asterisk next to 2021 as well for the regular season .”

Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament

Apparently the selection committee cares very much about RPI.... The asterisk will always be associated with both 2020 & 2021, they were not normal years.

There absolutely were teams not competing as "normal" that would have impacted the tournament. The entire make up of the tournament and seeding would have likely been very different if it were a normal season. It is what it is but to say that it was normal or that nothing would have been different and that nothing would have been impacted is simply ignorant.

--- "Who cares about RPI and your asterisk idea will never happen because it’s ridiculous, there is no team that did not play that would have impacted the NCAA tournament." ---

The above is an ignorant statement, obviously things would have been different and the tournament would have been impacted had the season had been normal.

And its not just the Ivies... good chance the Big 10 would have been exposed for being weaker than some people think, were they to play out of conference... will be interesting to see how they measure up this year...

Actually, it is much more likely that the Big 10 would have been acknowledged to be stronger overall last year had they played out of conference games. Very likely that an additional 2 Big 10 Teams would have been in the tournament and most certainly 2 Ivy’s with the possibility of a 3rd Ivy. It is very likely that 4 or 5 teams that made the tournament would have been bumped in a normal year. It is also very likely that many match ups would have been different. The entire tournament would have been different.

Yet the vast majority would agree the final four teams end up being the same. And Drexel...the mention of them looking good is what triggered this whole debate...would still have made the tournament because the CAA usually gets an at large bid lately in addition to conference champion. Would a couple of other programs have been bumped if the ivies played in 2020? Yes. Maybe Big 10 would have gotten another team in, but they had 4 and 3-4 has been the norm since MD left the ACC.

OK, Pretty sure Drexel is on the radar, who else? Michigan, Rutgers and Arizona State along with Drexel as the top up and coming programs. Michigan has been tough the past few years, Rutgers had a break out year in 2021 and Arizona St is going to continue to improve. I would also expect the new coach at Villanova to turn things around.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Drexel coaching staff left and is now at Villanova

Drexel lost an excellent coach. The new coach has had a pretty good mentor for the past 5 or 6 years I believe.
IMHO the new coach will do a great job. Drexel is a good school with a lot to offer and I hope they can build on the success they had last year s it is good for the sport.
I am not ready to put them as a perineal Top 20 but they are a good program, certainly one on the rise.

Excellent opportunity for any student athlete who wants to
embrace it, Drexel would be a great fit for a lot of kids.

Best thing about is it is connected to UPenn so the kids can learn by osmosis

Funny. Drexel a great school! As is Penn of course. University City in Philly is happening these days. Such a change from years ago.

US News & World Report ranks Drexel as #103 for national universities, Penn is ranked #8....

I don’t recall anyone trying to compare Drexel to Penn or saying Drexel was a better school than Penn.

What is your point?

The statement above was- "Drexel is a great school! As is Penn of course." Not sure what their requirements are for great, but I thought the rankings spoke for themselves, apparently not. I do not think the 8th ranked and 103rd ranked schools both fit in the same category of being great. Perhaps an example from a lacrosse perspective will help make the point. The 8th ranked team in the RPI after last season was Florida and the 103rd was Lafayette, would you consider both of them "great" lacrosse programs? Drexel is on the rise from a lacrosse perspective and I think they can be a top 20 team on a regular basis, academics are just fine but not great. Sorry that bothers you...

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Think that speaks to LI clubs focusing more on leagues and playdays and less on training. When you start to meet parents from other areas of the country you'll realize the focus is on training. You'll also hear about individul recruiting meetings(actual sit downs) to discuss a plan of action for recruiting. The top 15-20 LI kids will always go to strong programs but if the club landscape doesn't change you won't see much beyond that.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Stanford has a LI Top Guns recruit…

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Think that speaks to LI clubs focusing more on leagues and playdays and less on training. When you start to meet parents from other areas of the country you'll realize the focus is on training. You'll also hear about individul recruiting meetings(actual sit downs) to discuss a plan of action for recruiting. The top 15-20 LI kids will always go to strong programs but if the club landscape doesn't change you won't see much beyond that.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Think that speaks to LI clubs focusing more on leagues and playdays and less on training. When you start to meet parents from other areas of the country you'll realize the focus is on training. You'll also hear about individul recruiting meetings(actual sit downs) to discuss a plan of action for recruiting. The top 15-20 LI kids will always go to strong programs but if the club landscape doesn't change you won't see much beyond that.

This year will be no different than most years for Long Island players. We will see 20 - 25 players commit to The best 15 or so college programs. It would be rare to see many more than that.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Think that speaks to LI clubs focusing more on leagues and playdays and less on training. When you start to meet parents from other areas of the country you'll realize the focus is on training. You'll also hear about individul recruiting meetings(actual sit downs) to discuss a plan of action for recruiting. The top 15-20 LI kids will always go to strong programs but if the club landscape doesn't change you won't see much beyond that.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Think that speaks to LI clubs focusing more on leagues and playdays and less on training. When you start to meet parents from other areas of the country you'll realize the focus is on training. You'll also hear about individul recruiting meetings(actual sit downs) to discuss a plan of action for recruiting. The top 15-20 LI kids will always go to strong programs but if the club landscape doesn't change you won't see much beyond that.

This year will be no different than most years for Long Island players. We will see 20 - 25 players commit to The best 15 or so college programs. It would be rare to see many more than that.

It will also be much harder for girls to go to the elite schools. Princeton, Penn, Stanford. They will have to have actual gh SAT grades, unlike the past couple years where they got in off of inflated COVID grades.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Think that speaks to LI clubs focusing more on leagues and playdays and less on training. When you start to meet parents from other areas of the country you'll realize the focus is on training. You'll also hear about individul recruiting meetings(actual sit downs) to discuss a plan of action for recruiting. The top 15-20 LI kids will always go to strong programs but if the club landscape doesn't change you won't see much beyond that.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Think that speaks to LI clubs focusing more on leagues and playdays and less on training. When you start to meet parents from other areas of the country you'll realize the focus is on training. You'll also hear about individul recruiting meetings(actual sit downs) to discuss a plan of action for recruiting. The top 15-20 LI kids will always go to strong programs but if the club landscape doesn't change you won't see much beyond that.

This year will be no different than most years for Long Island players. We will see 20 - 25 players commit to The best 15 or so college programs. It would be rare to see many more than that.

It will also be much harder for girls to go to the elite schools. Princeton, Penn, Stanford. They will have to have actual gh SAT grades, unlike the past couple years where they got in off of inflated COVID grades.

Why post such nonsense.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Think that speaks to LI clubs focusing more on leagues and playdays and less on training. When you start to meet parents from other areas of the country you'll realize the focus is on training. You'll also hear about individul recruiting meetings(actual sit downs) to discuss a plan of action for recruiting. The top 15-20 LI kids will always go to strong programs but if the club landscape doesn't change you won't see much beyond that.

Are these individual meetings that the clubs provide to the players? Smart. LI needs to wisen up. The old way of doing things isn’t going to last.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Don’t understand how Stanford is even close to a traditional powerhouse, not even in the conversation. Don’t get me wrong I would give my right arm for any of my kids to attend, but the question was “traditional powers”

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Think that speaks to LI clubs focusing more on leagues and playdays and less on training. When you start to meet parents from other areas of the country you'll realize the focus is on training. You'll also hear about individul recruiting meetings(actual sit downs) to discuss a plan of action for recruiting. The top 15-20 LI kids will always go to strong programs but if the club landscape doesn't change you won't see much beyond that.

Are these individual meetings that the clubs provide to the players? Smart. LI needs to wisen up. The old way of doing things isn’t going to last.

From what I was told from parents of 2 different clubs. Yes. It was a sit down in your house with the club director at no additional cost. Must be nice!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Think that speaks to LI clubs focusing more on leagues and playdays and less on training. When you start to meet parents from other areas of the country you'll realize the focus is on training. You'll also hear about individul recruiting meetings(actual sit downs) to discuss a plan of action for recruiting. The top 15-20 LI kids will always go to strong programs but if the club landscape doesn't change you won't see much beyond that.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Think that speaks to LI clubs focusing more on leagues and playdays and less on training. When you start to meet parents from other areas of the country you'll realize the focus is on training. You'll also hear about individul recruiting meetings(actual sit downs) to discuss a plan of action for recruiting. The top 15-20 LI kids will always go to strong programs but if the club landscape doesn't change you won't see much beyond that.

This year will be no different than most years for Long Island players. We will see 20 - 25 players commit to The best 15 or so college programs. It would be rare to see many more than that.

It will also be much harder for girls to go to the elite schools. Princeton, Penn, Stanford. They will have to have actual gh SAT grades, unlike the past couple years where they got in off of inflated COVID grades.

Why post such nonsense.

So, you really think kids didn't have an easier time getting into elite schools as recruited athletes last year and this year? The had inflated grades and no standardized test requirement. Back to reality next year!

Duke is not even close to a powerhouse in Womens Lacrosse. They had one good year, 2021, courtesy of several high profile transfers and a one year business degree that sets the school apart from other post-grad options. Other than 2020, they've been distinctively 'meh'.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Don’t understand how Stanford is even close to a traditional powerhouse, not even in the conversation. Don’t get me wrong I would give my right arm for any of my kids to attend, but the question was “traditional powers”

I would put Stanford in the conversation as a perennial Top 15 - 25 Program, certainly one of the overall Top 15 - 20 Programs in the country. I realize that Stanford is not Maryland but Stanford has a stronger, more consistent program than 100 + other programs.

IMHO and based on actual Perform over the past 5 - 10 years I would put the following as the Top Programs:

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida
Penn
Notre Dame
Penn State
Loyola
JMU
USC
Stanford

and maybe Hopkins....

I am not the original person that posted but I will say that the above are the "traditional powers". I do not think that there are any other programs that are consistently ranked in the Top 20-25. The schools listed have proven it on the field and they are obviously many of the most coveted schools/programs by student athletes. Great Schools, Great Facilities, Great Programs....

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Duke is not even close to a powerhouse in Womens Lacrosse. They had one good year, 2021, courtesy of several high profile transfers and a one year business degree that sets the school apart from other post-grad options. Other than 2020, they've been distinctively 'meh'.

And will continue to be. Coaching is weak, and they don't have the horses.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Don’t understand how Stanford is even close to a traditional powerhouse, not even in the conversation. Don’t get me wrong I would give my right arm for any of my kids to attend, but the question was “traditional powers”

I would put Stanford in the conversation as a perennial Top 15 - 25 Program, certainly one of the overall Top 15 - 20 Programs in the country. I realize that Stanford is not Maryland but Stanford has a stronger, more consistent program than 100 + other programs.

IMHO and based on actual Perform over the past 5 - 10 years I would put the following as the Top Programs:

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida
Penn
Notre Dame
Penn State
Loyola
JMU
USC
Stanford

and maybe Hopkins....

I am not the original person that posted but I will say that the above are the "traditional powers". I do not think that there are any other programs that are consistently ranked in the Top 20-25. The schools listed have proven it on the field and they are obviously many of the most coveted schools/programs by student athletes. Great Schools, Great Facilities, Great Programs....

Duke as well.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Duke is not even close to a powerhouse in Womens Lacrosse. They had one good year, 2021, courtesy of several high profile transfers and a one year business degree that sets the school apart from other post-grad options. Other than 2020, they've been distinctively 'meh'.

And will continue to be. Coaching is weak, and they don't have the horses.

Duke year by year Final Ranking:

2010 - 5
2011 - 5
2012 - 6
2013 - 7
2014 - 8
2015 - 4
2016 - 11
2017 - NR
2018 - NR
2019 - 21
2020 - 18
2021 - 8

Duke is absolutely one of the powerhouse programs.

Would you even bother attending a camp or prospect day if the school-who you have sent film to and have touched base with at the appropriate times in the process (not being overbearing) has not peeped at your highlight video or even your profile?

Considering the players Duke gets (I would say the same thing about UVA), they should be able to get over the hump more often than they do. UVA is as aspirational a program/school as UNC and Duke almost is. I would put both schools ahead of BC, MD, NW as far as players desire to go there and play there and yet neither program is consistently in position to play for a national championship.

Using a screenshot of the other poster's Duke rankings:

2016 - 11
2017 - NR
2018 - NR
2019 - 21
2020 - 18
2021 - 8

in recent memory this program does not qualify as a powerhouse. Great school. would love to send my kid there but the facts dont put them in the powerhouse category.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Duke is not even close to a powerhouse in Womens Lacrosse. They had one good year, 2021, courtesy of several high profile transfers and a one year business degree that sets the school apart from other post-grad options. Other than 2020, they've been distinctively 'meh'.

And will continue to be. Coaching is weak, and they don't have the horses.

Duke year by year Final Ranking:

2010 - 5
2011 - 5
2012 - 6
2013 - 7
2014 - 8
2015 - 4
2016 - 11
2017 - NR
2018 - NR
2019 - 21
2020 - 18
2021 - 8

Duke is absolutely one of the powerhouse programs.

What have they ever won? Always a bridesmaid

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Don’t understand how Stanford is even close to a traditional powerhouse, not even in the conversation. Don’t get me wrong I would give my right arm for any of my kids to attend, but the question was “traditional powers”

I would put Stanford in the conversation as a perennial Top 15 - 25 Program, certainly one of the overall Top 15 - 20 Programs in the country. I realize that Stanford is not Maryland but Stanford has a stronger, more consistent program than 100 + other programs.

IMHO and based on actual Perform over the past 5 - 10 years I would put the following as the Top Programs:

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida
Penn
Notre Dame
Penn State
Loyola
JMU
USC
Stanford

and maybe Hopkins....

I am not the original person that posted but I will say that the above are the "traditional powers". I do not think that there are any other programs that are consistently ranked in the Top 20-25. The schools listed have proven it on the field and they are obviously many of the most coveted schools/programs by student athletes. Great Schools, Great Facilities, Great Programs....

Mostly agree but why USC over Duke or Hopkins? USC gets some talented players, but has had a couple of great years and that's about it. They always seem to be lumped in as a top program, though.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Don’t understand how Stanford is even close to a traditional powerhouse, not even in the conversation. Don’t get me wrong I would give my right arm for any of my kids to attend, but the question was “traditional powers”

I would put Stanford in the conversation as a perennial Top 15 - 25 Program, certainly one of the overall Top 15 - 20 Programs in the country. I realize that Stanford is not Maryland but Stanford has a stronger, more consistent program than 100 + other programs.

IMHO and based on actual Perform over the past 5 - 10 years I would put the following as the Top Programs:

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida
Penn
Notre Dame
Penn State
Loyola
JMU
USC
Stanford

and maybe Hopkins....

I am not the original person that posted but I will say that the above are the "traditional powers". I do not think that there are any other programs that are consistently ranked in the Top 20-25. The schools listed have proven it on the field and they are obviously many of the most coveted schools/programs by student athletes. Great Schools, Great Facilities, Great Programs....

Mostly agree but why USC over Duke or Hopkins? USC gets some talented players, but has had a couple of great years and that's about it. They always seem to be lumped in as a top program, though.

They went downhill after Devon Wills left. Keep an eye on Harvard, she is a good coach.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Don’t understand how Stanford is even close to a traditional powerhouse, not even in the conversation. Don’t get me wrong I would give my right arm for any of my kids to attend, but the question was “traditional powers”

I would put Stanford in the conversation as a perennial Top 15 - 25 Program, certainly one of the overall Top 15 - 20 Programs in the country. I realize that Stanford is not Maryland but Stanford has a stronger, more consistent program than 100 + other programs.

IMHO and based on actual Perform over the past 5 - 10 years I would put the following as the Top Programs:

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida
Penn
Notre Dame
Penn State
Loyola
JMU
USC
Stanford

and maybe Hopkins....

I am not the original person that posted but I will say that the above are the "traditional powers". I do not think that there are any other programs that are consistently ranked in the Top 20-25. The schools listed have proven it on the field and they are obviously many of the most coveted schools/programs by student athletes. Great Schools, Great Facilities, Great Programs....

Mostly agree but why USC over Duke or Hopkins? USC gets some talented players, but has had a couple of great years and that's about it. They always seem to be lumped in as a top program, though.

Agree but tough to put in a particular order maybe 1-10 and then 11-20. In any case Duke is definitely one of the Traditional Power Programs.

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida
Penn
Notre Dame
Penn State
Loyola
JMU
USC
Stanford
Hopkins
Duke

I don’t think there are any additional programs that consistently perform at the level of the teams listed above.

Michigan on the rise and has all the pieces in place to consistently be in this group.

Any other programs poised to compete on an annual basis?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Don’t understand how Stanford is even close to a traditional powerhouse, not even in the conversation. Don’t get me wrong I would give my right arm for any of my kids to attend, but the question was “traditional powers”

I would put Stanford in the conversation as a perennial Top 15 - 25 Program, certainly one of the overall Top 15 - 20 Programs in the country. I realize that Stanford is not Maryland but Stanford has a stronger, more consistent program than 100 + other programs.

IMHO and based on actual Perform over the past 5 - 10 years I would put the following as the Top Programs:

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida
Penn
Notre Dame
Penn State
Loyola
JMU
USC
Stanford

and maybe Hopkins....

I am not the original person that posted but I will say that the above are the "traditional powers". I do not think that there are any other programs that are consistently ranked in the Top 20-25. The schools listed have proven it on the field and they are obviously many of the most coveted schools/programs by student athletes. Great Schools, Great Facilities, Great Programs....

Mostly agree but why USC over Duke or Hopkins? USC gets some talented players, but has had a couple of great years and that's about it. They always seem to be lumped in as a top program, though.

USC's inaugural season was 2013. over the past 6 seasons they have done very well.

Where USC finished the season:

2016 - 5
2017 - 8
2018 - 24
2019 - 17
2020 - 7
2021 - NR

significantly better than Hopkins and Duke during that time period.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Any non traditional powers landing any top tier recruits?

Seems that way. No LI girls going to MD, NU, and Duke, Stanford, Cuse only have one a piece. Seems like the ‘23 class numbers are a little down for LI in general

Don’t understand how Stanford is even close to a traditional powerhouse, not even in the conversation. Don’t get me wrong I would give my right arm for any of my kids to attend, but the question was “traditional powers”

I would put Stanford in the conversation as a perennial Top 15 - 25 Program, certainly one of the overall Top 15 - 20 Programs in the country. I realize that Stanford is not Maryland but Stanford has a stronger, more consistent program than 100 + other programs.

IMHO and based on actual Perform over the past 5 - 10 years I would put the following as the Top Programs:

Maryland
North Carolina
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Princeton
Virginia
Stony Brook
Florida
Penn
Notre Dame
Penn State
Loyola
JMU
USC
Stanford

and maybe Hopkins....

I am not the original person that posted but I will say that the above are the "traditional powers". I do not think that there are any other programs that are consistently ranked in the Top 20-25. The schools listed have proven it on the field and they are obviously many of the most coveted schools/programs by student athletes. Great Schools, Great Facilities, Great Programs....

Mostly agree but why USC over Duke or Hopkins? USC gets some talented players, but has had a couple of great years and that's about it. They always seem to be lumped in as a top program, though.

USC's inaugural season was 2013. over the past 6 seasons they have done very well.

Where USC finished the season:

2016 - 5
2017 - 8
2018 - 24
2019 - 17
2020 - 7
2021 - NR

significantly better than Hopkins and Duke during that time period.

You're right, I stand corrected about Hopkins. I would still include Duke because they were top 10 2014-2016 and made a final four. Someone mentioned Michigan as an up and comer, and I would also add Denver as one to watch. In any case, all of these schools have a lot to offer and kudos to the players with the opportunity to play lacrosse at them.

Denver has been very good, let’s see if they can keep it up. Arizona st should continue to improve. Colorado has shown some signs that they have potential. Virginia Tech is a great school with a lot to offer. Interested watch Clemson develop. Villanova will improve with the new coach. Someone mentioned Harvard, I would say Dartmouth was on their way up but new coach there as well.
At the end of the day coaches need to be able to identify and attract talented athletes in order to be competitive. The challenge coaches face is trying to pull recruits away from the traditional top programs, all of those programs are good/great schools with very strong lacrosse tradition.

anyone know how the preseason games are going this week? I can't find scores posted anywhere.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

anyone know how the preseason games are going this week? I can't find scores posted anywhere.

I do not believe schools will post scores of fall ball scrimmages. Also, performance in the fall is not indicative of how a team will do in the spring.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

anyone know how the preseason games are going this week? I can't find scores posted anywhere.

No because no one cares and they are meaningless

Originally Posted by Anonymous

anyone know how the preseason games are going this week? I can't find scores posted anywhere.

No because no one cares and they are meaningless

They do on the mens side. They get full write ups in Inside Lacrosse. Nobody cares about women’s lacrosse is what your saying?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

anyone know how the preseason games are going this week? I can't find scores posted anywhere.

No because no one cares and they are meaningless

They do on the mens side. They get full write ups in Inside Lacrosse. Nobody cares about women’s lacrosse is what your saying?

Yeah, thanks captain

Originally Posted by Anonymous

anyone know how the preseason games are going this week? I can't find scores posted anywhere.

No because no one cares and they are meaningless

They do on the mens side. They get full write ups in Inside Lacrosse. Nobody cares about women’s lacrosse is what your saying?

That is correct...no one cares

Originally Posted by Anonymous

anyone know how the preseason games are going this week? I can't find scores posted anywhere.

No because no one cares and they are meaningless

They do on the mens side. They get full write ups in Inside Lacrosse. Nobody cares about women’s lacrosse is what your saying?

Yeah, thanks captain

No scores. Teams working on seeing who's playing well together and it which position. Lines, draws etc.... Ask the parents though...they'll tell you who won lol

Originally Posted by Anonymous

anyone know how the preseason games are going this week? I can't find scores posted anywhere.

No because no one cares and they are meaningless

They do on the mens side. They get full write ups in Inside Lacrosse. Nobody cares about women’s lacrosse is what your saying?

That is correct...no one cares

Although fall performance is not indicative of how the team will perform in the spring…. Everyone cares how the players/ team performs. Players, coaches, parents all care. The actual score is not important but performance is certainly important.

Tufts Lacrosse Player

On behalf of the Nicpon Family, we love you, our dearest Madie. Madie Nicpon was a beautiful and brilliant daughter, granddaughter, sister, and friend. Her contagious smile and laughter lit up every room. Her generosity and kindness has left a lasting impact on those around her. Please consider donating to assist the family in covering funeral and medical expenses.

https://gofund.me/73a0d366

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Tufts Lacrosse Player

On behalf of the Nicpon Family, we love you, our dearest Madie. Madie Nicpon was a beautiful and brilliant daughter, granddaughter, sister, and friend. Her contagious smile and laughter lit up every room. Her generosity and kindness has left a lasting impact on those around her. Please consider donating to assist the family in covering funeral and medical expenses.

https://gofund.me/73a0d366

This is so sad. May she Rest In Peace.

Which programs appear to be committing the top 2023's? How do the numbers look, are coaches committing fewer players than normal? Will coaches hold some spots to see who enters the portal after the season?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Which programs appear to be committing the top 2023's? How do the numbers look, are coaches committing fewer players than normal? Will coaches hold some spots to see who enters the portal after the season?

Seems like UNC and Syracuse by looking at the list of commits.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Which programs appear to be committing the top 2023's? How do the numbers look, are coaches committing fewer players than normal? Will coaches hold some spots to see who enters the portal after the season?

Seems like UNC and Syracuse by looking at the list of commits.

What about Florida?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Which programs appear to be committing the top 2023's? How do the numbers look, are coaches committing fewer players than normal? Will coaches hold some spots to see who enters the portal after the season?

Seems like UNC and Syracuse by looking at the list of commits.

Syracuse? No

2022 Final Four....

UNC, BC, MD & ??

Final Top 10....

North Carolina
Boston College
Maryland
?????

No particular order...

Syracuse
Northwestern
Virginia
Princeton
Loyola
????
????

How will Florida, Notre Dame, Duke, Michigan, Stanford, USC, Stony Brook, James Madison, Denver, Rutgers, Penn State, Hopkins, Penn Finish?

Can Drexel build on the success they had last year? How about Arizona St? Jacksoville?

Will there be any big surprises?

I will take the bait and say either SB or Cuse will make the final four this year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I will take the bait and say either SB or Cuse will make the final four this year.

Not this year. SBU will not finish Top 10. Syracuse has a chance but I don’t think that they will get there.

Syracuse will definitely be there, best offensive/defensive coaching duo in lacrosse and unbelievable talent top to bottom. Only thing I’m not sure on is the goalie situation.

I vote for Cuse with the hottest new coaching staff.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will definitely be there, best offensive/defensive coaching duo in lacrosse and unbelievable talent top to bottom. Only thing I’m not sure on is the goalie situation.

Are you talking about the Syracuse Men?

Cuse has several goalie transfers so they will be fine there but not sure about the offensive coaching , unproven at this point .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Cuse has several goalie transfers so they will be fine there but not sure about the offensive coaching , unproven at this point .

Really? pretty sure Kayla ran the offense at BC, guess last year wasn’t enough.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will definitely be there, best offensive/defensive coaching duo in lacrosse and unbelievable talent top to bottom. Only thing I’m not sure on is the goalie situation.

Complete nonsense.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

2022 Final Four....

UNC, BC, MD & ??

Final Top 10....

North Carolina
Boston College
Maryland
?????

No particular order...

Syracuse
Northwestern
Virginia
Princeton
Loyola
????
????

How will Florida, Notre Dame, Duke, Michigan, Stanford, USC, Stony Brook, James Madison, Denver, Rutgers, Penn State, Hopkins, Penn Finish?

Can Drexel build on the success they had last year? How about Arizona St? Jacksoville?

Will there be any big surprises?

Florida, ND, Duke all have the same problem coaching. Michigan not enough talent. Out of the above listed teams I would go with JMU and Stony Brook to round out the top 10.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

2022 Final Four....

UNC, BC, MD & ??

Final Top 10....

North Carolina
Boston College
Maryland
?????

No particular order...

Syracuse
Northwestern
Virginia
Princeton
Loyola
????
????

How will Florida, Notre Dame, Duke, Michigan, Stanford, USC, Stony Brook, James Madison, Denver, Rutgers, Penn State, Hopkins, Penn Finish?

Can Drexel build on the success they had last year? How about Arizona St? Jacksoville?

Will there be any big surprises?

Florida, ND, Duke all have the same problem coaching. Michigan not enough talent. Out of the above listed teams I would go with JMU and Stony Brook to round out the top 10.

I too believed SB would drop off quite a bit from last season but happened to see them twice once with my one daughter against average competition and then went up to see my other daughter in Brown Play Day and was really really impressed fast and skilled they beat us handily as was expected but the game after I watched them go blow for blow with Boston College and while results do not matter they got upper hand on BC. I will also state the obvious but it was my first time watching Charlotte North in person and WOW is she something. Seemed like both teams were playing top players in that one. Left there also impressed with Umass think they will be a top 20 team,
Another team that I believe will be a top 10 besides SB will be Princeton they return so much talent.
Saw Loyola and really liked their talent level and to comment on the previous post I think Virginia is not very good My way too early prediction of a final 4 is
Syracuse
BC
UNC
Northwestern( Not sure about this one)

Originally Posted by Anonymous

2022 Final Four....

UNC, BC, MD & ??

Final Top 10....

North Carolina
Boston College
Maryland
?????

No particular order...

Syracuse
Northwestern
Virginia
Princeton
Loyola
????
????

How will Florida, Notre Dame, Duke, Michigan, Stanford, USC, Stony Brook, James Madison, Denver, Rutgers, Penn State, Hopkins, Penn Finish?

Can Drexel build on the success they had last year? How about Arizona St? Jacksoville?

Will there be any big surprises?

Florida, ND, Duke all have the same problem coaching. Michigan not enough talent. Out of the above listed teams I would go with JMU and Stony Brook to round out the top 10.

I too believed SB would drop off quite a bit from last season but happened to see them twice once with my one daughter against average competition and then went up to see my other daughter in Brown Play Day and was really really impressed fast and skilled they beat us handily as was expected but the game after I watched them go blow for blow with Boston College and while results do not matter they got upper hand on BC. I will also state the obvious but it was my first time watching Charlotte North in person and WOW is she something. Seemed like both teams were playing top players in that one. Left there also impressed with Umass think they will be a top 20 team,
Another team that I believe will be a top 10 besides SB will be Princeton they return so much talent.
Saw Loyola and really liked their talent level and to comment on the previous post I think Virginia is not very good My way too early prediction of a final 4 is
Syracuse
BC
UNC
Northwestern( Not sure about this one)

Don’t think Syracuse make the Final Four, Don’t think BC repeats… agree about UMass, Loyola and Princeton. Not so much with Stony Brook and UVA.

Jaime Ortega signed the first major sponsorship in Women's lacrosse with Epoch. Congrats to her! Interesting that they went with her over Charlotte North who's gotten all the hype over the past year..having watched both play Ortega is a much more well rounded player. North has the physicality and power advantage but that's about it. I'm sure North will get sponsored soon enough.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

2022 Final Four....

UNC, BC, MD & ??

Final Top 10....

North Carolina
Boston College
Maryland
?????

No particular order...

Syracuse
Northwestern
Virginia
Princeton
Loyola
????
????

How will Florida, Notre Dame, Duke, Michigan, Stanford, USC, Stony Brook, James Madison, Denver, Rutgers, Penn State, Hopkins, Penn Finish?

Can Drexel build on the success they had last year? How about Arizona St? Jacksoville?

Will there be any big surprises?

Florida, ND, Duke all have the same problem coaching. Michigan not enough talent. Out of the above listed teams I would go with JMU and Stony Brook to round out the top 10.

I too believed SB would drop off quite a bit from last season but happened to see them twice once with my one daughter against average competition and then went up to see my other daughter in Brown Play Day and was really really impressed fast and skilled they beat us handily as was expected but the game after I watched them go blow for blow with Boston College and while results do not matter they got upper hand on BC. I will also state the obvious but it was my first time watching Charlotte North in person and WOW is she something. Seemed like both teams were playing top players in that one. Left there also impressed with Umass think they will be a top 20 team,
Another team that I believe will be a top 10 besides SB will be Princeton they return so much talent.
Saw Loyola and really liked their talent level and to comment on the previous post I think Virginia is not very good My way too early prediction of a final 4 is
Syracuse
BC
UNC
Northwestern( Not sure about this one)

BC was without their 2nd, 3rd and 4th leading scorer and goalie vs Stony Brook. Those 3 players feed on zone defenses which is what Stony Brook plays. Very good chance the same four teams make the final four - UNC, Cuse, NW and BC. All very talented and well coached. Fairly meaningful drop off after those four.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

2022 Final Four....

UNC, BC, MD & ??

Final Top 10....

North Carolina
Boston College
Maryland
?????

No particular order...

Syracuse
Northwestern
Virginia
Princeton
Loyola
????
????

How will Florida, Notre Dame, Duke, Michigan, Stanford, USC, Stony Brook, James Madison, Denver, Rutgers, Penn State, Hopkins, Penn Finish?

Can Drexel build on the success they had last year? How about Arizona St? Jacksoville?

Will there be any big surprises?

Florida, ND, Duke all have the same problem coaching. Michigan not enough talent. Out of the above listed teams I would go with JMU and Stony Brook to round out the top 10.

I too believed SB would drop off quite a bit from last season but happened to see them twice once with my one daughter against average competition and then went up to see my other daughter in Brown Play Day and was really really impressed fast and skilled they beat us handily as was expected but the game after I watched them go blow for blow with Boston College and while results do not matter they got upper hand on BC. I will also state the obvious but it was my first time watching Charlotte North in person and WOW is she something. Seemed like both teams were playing top players in that one. Left there also impressed with Umass think they will be a top 20 team,
Another team that I believe will be a top 10 besides SB will be Princeton they return so much talent.
Saw Loyola and really liked their talent level and to comment on the previous post I think Virginia is not very good My way too early prediction of a final 4 is
Syracuse
BC
UNC
Northwestern( Not sure about this one)

BC was without their 2nd, 3rd and 4th leading scorer and goalie vs Stony Brook. Those 3 players feed on zone defenses which is what Stony Brook plays. Very good chance the same four teams make the final four - UNC, Cuse, NW and BC. All very talented and well coached. Fairly meaningful drop off after those four.

Standard played a tight scrimmage with NU, they may surprise this year

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Jaime Ortega signed the first major sponsorship in Women's lacrosse with Epoch. Congrats to her! Interesting that they went with her over Charlotte North who's gotten all the hype over the past year..having watched both play Ortega is a much more well rounded player. North has the physicality and power advantage but that's about it. I'm sure North will get sponsored soon enough.

Not even close to being a much more well rounded player.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

2022 Final Four....

UNC, BC, MD & ??

Final Top 10....

North Carolina
Boston College
Maryland
?????

No particular order...

Syracuse
Northwestern
Virginia
Princeton
Loyola
????
????

How will Florida, Notre Dame, Duke, Michigan, Stanford, USC, Stony Brook, James Madison, Denver, Rutgers, Penn State, Hopkins, Penn Finish?

Can Drexel build on the success they had last year? How about Arizona St? Jacksoville?

Will there be any big surprises?

Florida, ND, Duke all have the same problem coaching. Michigan not enough talent. Out of the above listed teams I would go with JMU and Stony Brook to round out the top 10.

I too believed SB would drop off quite a bit from last season but happened to see them twice once with my one daughter against average competition and then went up to see my other daughter in Brown Play Day and was really really impressed fast and skilled they beat us handily as was expected but the game after I watched them go blow for blow with Boston College and while results do not matter they got upper hand on BC. I will also state the obvious but it was my first time watching Charlotte North in person and WOW is she something. Seemed like both teams were playing top players in that one. Left there also impressed with Umass think they will be a top 20 team,
Another team that I believe will be a top 10 besides SB will be Princeton they return so much talent.
Saw Loyola and really liked their talent level and to comment on the previous post I think Virginia is not very good My way too early prediction of a final 4 is
Syracuse
BC
UNC
Northwestern( Not sure about this one)

BC was without their 2nd, 3rd and 4th leading scorer and goalie vs Stony Brook. Those 3 players feed on zone defenses which is what Stony Brook plays. Very good chance the same four teams make the final four - UNC, Cuse, NW and BC. All very talented and well coached. Fairly meaningful drop off after those four.

When was the last time a team that played a Zone won the Championship?

Don’t think cause gets to the final four.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Jaime Ortega signed the first major sponsorship in Women's lacrosse with Epoch. Congrats to her! Interesting that they went with her over Charlotte North who's gotten all the hype over the past year..having watched both play Ortega is a much more well rounded player. North has the physicality and power advantage but that's about it. I'm sure North will get sponsored soon enough.

Such a transparent post. Just go away.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Jaime Ortega signed the first major sponsorship in Women's lacrosse with Epoch. Congrats to her! Interesting that they went with her over Charlotte North who's gotten all the hype over the past year..having watched both play Ortega is a much more well rounded player. North has the physicality and power advantage but that's about it. I'm sure North will get sponsored soon enough.

Such a transparent post. Just go away.

Makes sense for Epoch to go with Ortega. UNC ia a partner with Epoch lacrosse.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Jaime Ortega signed the first major sponsorship in Women's lacrosse with Epoch. Congrats to her! Interesting that they went with her over Charlotte North who's gotten all the hype over the past year..having watched both play Ortega is a much more well rounded player. North has the physicality and power advantage but that's about it. I'm sure North will get sponsored soon enough.

Such a transparent post. Just go away.

Makes sense for Epoch to go with Ortega. UNC ia a partner with Epoch lacrosse.

IMHO the only reason for the post was to try knock CN and hype JO.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Jaime Ortega signed the first major sponsorship in Women's lacrosse with Epoch. Congrats to her! Interesting that they went with her over Charlotte North who's gotten all the hype over the past year..having watched both play Ortega is a much more well rounded player. North has the physicality and power advantage but that's about it. I'm sure North will get sponsored soon enough.

Such a transparent post. Just go away.

Makes sense for Epoch to go with Ortega. UNC ia a partner with Epoch lacrosse.

IMHO the only reason for the post was to try knock CN and hype JO.

Way to go JO!! She deserves it.

Since 2011 (10 full seasons) 11 different Programs have made the Final Four and 5 have won the National Championship. The same 4 teams have never advanced to the Final Four in back to back years during that time period. Maryland is the only team to win back to back championships 2014 & 2015.

- Team - Final Fours - National Championships since 2011

Maryland - 9 - 4

UNC - 7 - 2

Northwestern - 6 - 2

Syracuse - 6 - 0

Boston College - 4 - 1

Penn State - 2 - 0

Duke - 2 - 0

JMU - 1 - 1

Virginia - 1 - 0

Florida - 1 - 0

Navy - 1 - 0

I think it will be much the same this year, we will see at least 1 different team in the Final Four and we will not see BC win back to back championships.

Two college players previously signed with STX and none of these sponsorships are major in a non revenue sport. Also, CN could sign with anyone she wanted if she was not looking for bigger deals. She has 45k followers more than 4 times any other college players

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]2022 Final Four....

UNC, BC, MD & ??

Final Top 10....

North Carolina
Boston College
Maryland
?????

No particular order...

Syracuse
Northwestern
Virginia
Princeton
Loyola
????
????

How will Florida, Notre Dame, Duke, Michigan, Stanford, USC, Stony Brook, James Madison, Denver, Rutgers, Penn State, Hopkins, Penn Finish?

Can Drexel build on the success they had last year? How about Arizona St? Jacksoville?

Will there be any big surprises?

Florida, ND, Duke all have the same problem coaching. Michigan not enough talent. Out of the above listed teams I would go with JMU and Stony Brook to round out the top 10.

I too believed SB would drop off quite a bit from last season but happened to see them twice once with my one daughter against average competition and then went up to see my other daughter in Brown Play Day and was really really impressed fast and skilled they beat us handily as was expected but the game after I watched them go blow for blow with Boston College and while results do not matter they got upper hand on BC. I will also state the obvious but it was my first time watching Charlotte North in person and WOW is she something. Seemed like both teams were playing top players in that one. Left there also impressed with Umass think they will be a top 20 team,
Another team that I believe will be a top 10 besides SB will be Princeton they return so much talent.
Saw Loyola and really liked their talent level and to comment on the previous post I think Virginia is not very good My way too early prediction of a final 4 is
Syracuse
BC
UNC
Northwestern( Not sure about this one)

BC was without their 2nd, 3rd and 4th leading scorer and goalie vs Stony Brook. Those 3 players feed on zone defenses which is what Stony Brook plays. Very good chance the same four teams make the final four - UNC, Cuse, NW and BC. All very talented and well coached. Fairly meaningful drop off after those four.

When was the last time a team that played a Zone won the Championship?

Don’t think cause gets to the final four.[/quoted

JMU plays a zone

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]2022 Final Four....

UNC, BC, MD & ??

Final Top 10....

North Carolina
Boston College
Maryland
?????

No particular order...

Syracuse
Northwestern
Virginia
Princeton
Loyola
????
????

How will Florida, Notre Dame, Duke, Michigan, Stanford, USC, Stony Brook, James Madison, Denver, Rutgers, Penn State, Hopkins, Penn Finish?

Can Drexel build on the success they had last year? How about Arizona St? Jacksoville?

Will there be any big surprises?

Florida, ND, Duke all have the same problem coaching. Michigan not enough talent. Out of the above listed teams I would go with JMU and Stony Brook to round out the top 10.

I too believed SB would drop off quite a bit from last season but happened to see them twice once with my one daughter against average competition and then went up to see my other daughter in Brown Play Day and was really really impressed fast and skilled they beat us handily as was expected but the game after I watched them go blow for blow with Boston College and while results do not matter they got upper hand on BC. I will also state the obvious but it was my first time watching Charlotte North in person and WOW is she something. Seemed like both teams were playing top players in that one. Left there also impressed with Umass think they will be a top 20 team,
Another team that I believe will be a top 10 besides SB will be Princeton they return so much talent.
Saw Loyola and really liked their talent level and to comment on the previous post I think Virginia is not very good My way too early prediction of a final 4 is
Syracuse
BC
UNC
Northwestern( Not sure about this one)

BC was without their 2nd, 3rd and 4th leading scorer and goalie vs Stony Brook. Those 3 players feed on zone defenses which is what Stony Brook plays. Very good chance the same four teams make the final four - UNC, Cuse, NW and BC. All very talented and well coached. Fairly meaningful drop off after those four.

When was the last time a team that played a Zone won the Championship?

Don’t think cause gets to the final four.[/quoted

JMU plays a zone

Pretty sure they played man when they won.

Nope - JMU much like Cuse and Stony Brook only plays a zone. NW also played zone last year.

If I had the choice my kid would play w JO . Nice kid who generally plays the right way . All you CN super fans have never spoken w many of her teammates on Duke , BC or the US team , I have , The kid is a brutal teammate .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If I had the choice my kid would play w JO . Nice kid who generally plays the right way . All you CN super fans have never spoken w many of her teammates on Duke , BC or the US team , I have , The kid is a brutal teammate .

Just go away.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If I had the choice my kid would play w JO . Nice kid who generally plays the right way . All you CN super fans have never spoken w many of her teammates on Duke , BC or the US team , I have , The kid is a brutal teammate .

You have no idea what you’re talking about, the BC portion is simply not true.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If I had the choice my kid would play w JO . Nice kid who generally plays the right way . All you CN super fans have never spoken w many of her teammates on Duke , BC or the US team , I have , The kid is a brutal teammate .

Just go away.

JO has been consistent since her freshman year. Impact player through and through. CN had been pretty average until last year when she exploded. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If I had the choice my kid would play w JO . Nice kid who generally plays the right way . All you CN super fans have never spoken w many of her teammates on Duke , BC or the US team , I have , The kid is a brutal teammate .

Just go away.

JO has been consistent since her freshman year. Impact player through and through. CN had been pretty average until last year when she exploded. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Nothing against JO, she is a very good player. You on the other hand are exactly what is wrong with this sport. Not sure what your problem is but you should probably get some help.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If I had the choice my kid would play w JO . Nice kid who generally plays the right way . All you CN super fans have never spoken w many of her teammates on Duke , BC or the US team , I have , The kid is a brutal teammate .

Just go away.

JO has been consistent since her freshman year. Impact player through and through. CN had been pretty average until last year when she exploded. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Nothing against JO, she is a very good player. You on the other hand are exactly what is wrong with this sport. Not sure what your problem is but you should probably get some help.

Sounds like someone is defending why their daughter is better than a National Champ MVP and Tewaaraton winner. Please stop!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If I had the choice my kid would play w JO . Nice kid who generally plays the right way . All you CN super fans have never spoken w many of her teammates on Duke , BC or the US team , I have , The kid is a brutal teammate .

Just go away.

JO has been consistent since her freshman year. Impact player through and through. CN had been pretty average until last year when she exploded. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Nothing against JO, she is a very good player. You on the other hand are exactly what is wrong with this sport. Not sure what your problem is but you should probably get some help.

Sounds like someone is defending why their daughter is better than a National Champ MVP and Tewaaraton winner. Please stop!

I'm sure it's the same clown from last year, same nonsense... the person obviously has issues, it's sad actually.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If I had the choice my kid would play w JO . Nice kid who generally plays the right way . All you CN super fans have never spoken w many of her teammates on Duke , BC or the US team , I have , The kid is a brutal teammate .

Just go away.

JO has been consistent since her freshman year. Impact player through and through. CN had been pretty average until last year when she exploded. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Nothing against JO, she is a very good player. You on the other hand are exactly what is wrong with this sport. Not sure what your problem is but you should probably get some help.

Sounds like someone is defending why their daughter is better than a National Champ MVP and Tewaaraton winner. Please stop!

Why do you always assume its the parent? Is no one else allowed an opinion?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If I had the choice my kid would play w JO . Nice kid who generally plays the right way . All you CN super fans have never spoken w many of her teammates on Duke , BC or the US team , I have , The kid is a brutal teammate .

Just go away.

JO has been consistent since her freshman year. Impact player through and through. CN had been pretty average until last year when she exploded. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Nothing against JO, she is a very good player. You on the other hand are exactly what is wrong with this sport. Not sure what your problem is but you should probably get some help.

Sounds like someone is defending why their daughter is better than a National Champ MVP and Tewaaraton winner. Please stop!

Why do you always assume its the parent? Is no one else allowed an opinion?

When they have no argument their first instinct is to blame the fictitious parent.

Whether you are JO's parent or not is irrelevant, you are a coward spewing nonsense on this site. You are a small minded individual who just can't stand it that CN is twice the player that your daughter is and everybody knows it. Bitter and jealous must be a tough way to go through life. CN will win the Tewaaraton again and you will still be you, so go back to your miserable life and continue to bash and tear down young women who you do not even know.

Maybe the parents of and the teammates themselves of CN lie but the ones I have spoken with say the same thing, nice enough kid off the field and a difficult player to play with. Watch the end of the BC game against USC last year and explain how its being a good teammate or even good sportsmanship. Watch her teammates faces and they are obviously disgusted .The jealousy angle is just ridiculous and yes I believe people are allowed to like different playing styles as far as the national championship thing it was won by a team not just her ,honestly she was underwhelming in the win over UNC but ortega was just as underwhelming in the loss .Is she an exceptional player ,yes,is she all about herself , yes. The antics on meaningless goals are ridiculous and again in my opinion neither JO or CN are the best players in the country, give me Emma Trenchard anytime .

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Whether you are JO's parent or not is irrelevant, you are a coward spewing nonsense on this site. You are a small minded individual who just can't stand it that CN is twice the player that your daughter is and everybody knows it. Bitter and jealous must be a tough way to go through life. CN will win the Tewaaraton again and you will still be you, so go back to your miserable life and continue to bash and tear down young women who you do not even know.

i'm not a parent. i just think JO is better than CN. look at their career stats. JO easily would have have the Tewaaraton had UNC won the championship. CN won it because she was the last standing, not because she was exceptionally better than everyone else.

I think most people are finally realizing that CN is MUCH better than everyone else. She is a generational talent that does things nobody else has done in woman's lacrosse. She does it on the draw and she dominates on the offensive end even though every team is game planning to stop her. Few teams game planned to stop JO last year - more teams focused on KH. This summer CN played with the National Team which is made up of the best of the best to have ever played the game and she dominated. That says it all. You can not say the same thing for the other Tewaaraton Finalists. She is simply better than every other college player and if you polled fans and parents across the country they would overwhelmingly agree!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think most people are finally realizing that CN is MUCH better than everyone else. She is a generational talent that does things nobody else has done in woman's lacrosse. She does it on the draw and she dominates on the offensive end even though every team is game planning to stop her. Few teams game planned to stop JO last year - more teams focused on KH. This summer CN played with the National Team which is made up of the best of the best to have ever played the game and she dominated. That says it all. You can not say the same thing for the other Tewaaraton Finalists. She is simply better than every other college player and if you polled fans and parents across the country they would overwhelmingly agree!

i can think of 5-7 names before CN comes up. that isn't generational..Where was CN her first 2 years? Generational players have generational production and impact the moment they arrive on campus. CN could not elevate duke and bailed. i've seen many players rip bombs from 20 yards out. CN not the first to do it.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think most people are finally realizing that CN is MUCH better than everyone else. She is a generational talent that does things nobody else has done in woman's lacrosse. She does it on the draw and she dominates on the offensive end even though every team is game planning to stop her. Few teams game planned to stop JO last year - more teams focused on KH. This summer CN played with the National Team which is made up of the best of the best to have ever played the game and she dominated. That says it all. You can not say the same thing for the other Tewaaraton Finalists. She is simply better than every other college player and if you polled fans and parents across the country they would overwhelmingly agree!

What a bunch of nonsense. What is she doing that no one else has done? She is good at the draw but not dominate ,not the best in the country and was exposed in her semi final. Ask her US teammates if they like playing with her, they do not. As far as who performed the best at the US team training and scrimmages it was another Tewaaraton Finalist who was the consensus best player who both Spalllina and Levy said was the MVP of the tryouts but dont let that get in the way of your ill informed blabbering.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think most people are finally realizing that CN is MUCH better than everyone else. She is a generational talent that does things nobody else has done in woman's lacrosse. She does it on the draw and she dominates on the offensive end even though every team is game planning to stop her. Few teams game planned to stop JO last year - more teams focused on KH. This summer CN played with the National Team which is made up of the best of the best to have ever played the game and she dominated. That says it all. You can not say the same thing for the other Tewaaraton Finalists. She is simply better than every other college player and if you polled fans and parents across the country they would overwhelmingly agree!

What a bunch of nonsense. What is she doing that no one else has done? She is good at the draw but not dominate ,not the best in the country and was exposed in her semi final. Ask her US teammates if they like playing with her, they do not. As far as who performed the best at the US team training and scrimmages it was another Tewaaraton Finalist who was the consensus best player who both Spalllina and Levy said was the MVP of the tryouts but dont let that get in the way of your ill informed blabbering.

Some of you really need to get help. CN is the best player in the college game. And by the way, CN is not a "Tewarraton award Finalist", she is a Tewarraton Award Winner. Tryout MVP, good grief, that's where you are going to take this? CN won a national championship, was the MVP and Won the highest award the sport has to offer. None of your BS will change that, you will have to live with it. You should prepare yourself for more misery this year because she will be the favorite to win it again.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I think most people are finally realizing that CN is MUCH better than everyone else. She is a generational talent that does things nobody else has done in woman's lacrosse. She does it on the draw and she dominates on the offensive end even though every team is game planning to stop her. Few teams game planned to stop JO last year - more teams focused on KH. This summer CN played with the National Team which is made up of the best of the best to have ever played the game and she dominated. That says it all. You can not say the same thing for the other Tewaaraton Finalists. She is simply better than every other college player and if you polled fans and parents across the country they would overwhelmingly agree!

What a bunch of nonsense. What is she doing that no one else has done? She is good at the draw but not dominate ,not the best in the country and was exposed in her semi final. Ask her US teammates if they like playing with her, they do not. As far as who performed the best at the US team training and scrimmages it was another Tewaaraton Finalist who was the consensus best player who both Spalllina and Levy said was the MVP of the tryouts but dont let that get in the way of your ill informed blabbering.

Ask her US teammates huh...... since you want to talk like you are an authority why dont you tell us how many of her US teammates YOU have spoken to and how many dont like playing with her. Please provide the details. As usual you are the kind of person who talks out their donkey.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If I had the choice my kid would play w JO . Nice kid who generally plays the right way . All you CN super fans have never spoken w many of her teammates on Duke , BC or the US team , I have , The kid is a brutal teammate .

My Daughter plays on BC.. this is a lie. Amazing teammate.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If I had the choice my kid would play w JO . Nice kid who generally plays the right way . All you CN super fans have never spoken w many of her teammates on Duke , BC or the US team , I have , The kid is a brutal teammate .

My Daughter plays on BC.. this is a lie. Amazing teammate.

Of course it’s a lie… that’s what small minded jealous little parents who just can’t stand it when other players are recognized as being better than their daughter do. Pathetic people.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

If I had the choice my kid would play w JO . Nice kid who generally plays the right way . All you CN super fans have never spoken w many of her teammates on Duke , BC or the US team , I have , The kid is a brutal teammate .

My Daughter plays on BC.. this is a lie. Amazing teammate.

Of course it’s a lie… that’s what small minded jealous little parents who just can’t stand it when other players are recognized as being better than their daughter do. Pathetic people.

--- "Few players felt the love more than Charlotte North, Boston College’s dynamo and Tewaaraton Award winner who led all scorers with six points (three goals, three assists). Each one of her touches turned everyone in attendance into a videographer, as cell phones around William G. Tierney Field pointed toward the field. “Charlotte!” yells echoed through the night." ---

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/south-florida-to-add-di-women-s-lacrosse-for-2023-24/58596

South Florida adding Women’s Lacrosse! Great news… more opportunities!!

Congratulations!!

https://www.usalaxmagazine.com/usa-...-for-texas-debut-at-iwlca-presidents-cup

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Congratulations!!

https://www.usalaxmagazine.com/usa-...-for-texas-debut-at-iwlca-presidents-cup

34 Players from 10 Programs

11 - North Carolina
7 - Syracuse
4 - Maryland
4 - Boston College
3 - Stony Brook
1 - Northwestern
1 - Florida
1 - JMU
1 - USC
1 - UConn

Surprised on a couple different names here. Those invited and one not on team anymore. Obviously JS driving the bus from a coaching perspective.

Good luck to all this weekend.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Surprised on a couple different names here. Those invited and one not on team anymore. Obviously JS driving the bus from a coaching perspective.

Good luck to all this weekend.

Why do you feel JS is driving the “bus”? There doesn’t appear to be an influx of SB players.

Why? Style of play completely a SB style. Also being at games in At US lax HQ vs Canada and BC he was doing all the coaching.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Surprised on a couple different names here. Those invited and one not on team anymore. Obviously JS driving the bus from a coaching perspective.

Good luck to all this weekend.

Who are you talking about?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Surprised on a couple different names here. Those invited and one not on team anymore. Obviously JS driving the bus from a coaching perspective.

Good luck to all this weekend.

Who are you talking about?

I would think (based on the discussion) the 34 players representing Team USA...

I often scratch my head why some of these individuals continue to play beyond their mid 20s. It's similar to minor league baseball players that don't stop.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I often scratch my head why some of these individuals continue to play beyond their mid 20s. It's similar to minor league baseball players that don't stop.

Maybe, just maybe they love to play.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I often scratch my head why some of these individuals continue to play beyond their mid 20s. It's similar to minor league baseball players that don't stop.

That's an ignorant comment. Obviously they love the sport and want/can continue to play. If they weren't good enough, they wouldn't be playing, so why does age matter?

Does anyone know if the US team game will be streamed online somewhere?

It will be interesting to see if SB and UNC programs hold to high standards with coaches consumed in USA. All relative of course that would be conference championships and elite eight to final four appearances. If history holds true we should see a drop as we saw with GTown and RF.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It will be interesting to see if SB and UNC programs hold to high standards with coaches consumed in USA. All relative of course that would be conference championships and elite eight to final four appearances. If history holds true we should see a drop as we saw with GTown and RF.

Stony Brook has never made the Final Four, not sure exactly how many times they have made elite eight and would not put winning The AE in the same category as winning The ACC.

Not sure what has gone wrong at Georgetown but I don’t think it has anything to do with the coach having been involved with US Team. Surprised he is still there.

North Carolina will not be affected at all, the school simply has too much to offer and is a very desirable destination for a very large percentage of high end players.

If SBU drops off at all the only reason would be if JS can not find talent interested in going to SBU which has never been the case.

I believe both programs will remain two of the top 10 overall programs.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It will be interesting to see if SB and UNC programs hold to high standards with coaches consumed in USA. All relative of course that would be conference championships and elite eight to final four appearances. If history holds true we should see a drop as we saw with GTown and RF.

Pretty sure SBU will maintain status quo as will UNC but I would not consider the two programs to have similar track records or the same "high standards" when it comes to the NCAA Tournament.

Stony Brook NCAA Tournament history: Elite Eight 3x, No Final Four appearances.

2013: They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

2014: They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2015: They Lost to Princeton in round of 16.

2016: They Lost to Syracuse in round of 16.

2017: They Lost to Maryland in round of 8.

2018: They Lost to Boston College in round of 8.

2019: They Lost to Maryland in the round of 16.

2020: Season cut short.

2021: They Lost to North Carolina in the round of 8.

Pretty big shoes to fill, very impressive career.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/arti...st-season-at-the-helm-at-princeton/58639

Well based on Inside Lacrosse it looks like UNC should run away with it for again this year, Oh wait they haven’t won it in last 6 years. They have 4 in top 11 and make up 25 percent of the 25(not including 2 very good players TW or SG). Can’t have talent like that and not win the big one more often- meaning Natty, not conference.

BC who won and has everyone coming back only has 3 total, as well as CUSE. Don’t sleep on JS, he has some talent at SB.

Should be interesting if IL ratings are right. LOL.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well based on Inside Lacrosse it looks like UNC should run away with it for again this year, Oh wait they haven’t won it in last 6 years. They have 4 in top 11 and make up 25 percent of the 25(not including 2 very good players TW or SG). Can’t have talent like that and not win the big one more often- meaning Natty, not conference.

BC who won and has everyone coming back only has 3 total, as well as CUSE. Don’t sleep on JS, he has some talent at SB.

Should be interesting if IL ratings are right. LOL.

Typical hater post... pretty sure BC had at least 4 First Team All-Americans (more than any other team) and a Tewaaraton Award Winner in 2019 and did not win. Syracuse has never won a National Championship (have they ever won anything?) and Stony Brook rarely even makes it to the Final Eight (Quarterfinals) and has never made it to a Final Four (at least they win the America East) yet you mock UNC who has 2 NCAA National Championships, 4 NCAA Finals appearances , 12 NCAA Final Four Appearances, 6 ACC Championships and a Coach who sits at number three in all time wins... All of that was accomplished without a single Tewaaraton Award winner.

Classic, just classic.

Does anyone know if any other colleges/universities will be adding women's lacrosse programs in the next couple of years? Is that posted publicly somewhere or is that all hush hush until it becomes official? just curious..

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Does anyone know if any other colleges/universities will be adding women's lacrosse programs in the next couple of years? Is that posted publicly somewhere or is that all hush hush until it becomes official? just curious..

USF announced they are adding
I don’t think it’s hush hush

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Does anyone know if any other colleges/universities will be adding women's lacrosse programs in the next couple of years? Is that posted publicly somewhere or is that all hush hush until it becomes official? just curious..

This is a good site to stay abreast:

http://thegrowthblog.blogspot.com/p/new-varsity-college-programs.html?m=1

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Does anyone know if any other colleges/universities will be adding women's lacrosse programs in the next couple of years? Is that posted publicly somewhere or is that all hush hush until it becomes official? just curious..

University of Rhode Island to Add Women's Lacrosse

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

I think most have been using Lacrosse to get into schools for years. Most likely the Stanford haters have their own psychotic agenda I.e. trying to diminish the players who commit there…

The opportunities for young women who excel on the field as well as in the classroom are incredible.

Try getting into Stanford, Princeton, Penn, Duke, Northwestern etc… without Lacrosse.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

My daughter has seen or played with some of the girls mentioned in the article. Stanford being #1 class this year is a no brainer when considering the 2020 redshirts. My daughter says Humphrey was the best 2020 attacker in spite of IL Women ranking her behind two other attack players. For some players, a top academic school is very important and that's nothing new. Some players aren't interested in being on the West coast but for some it's appealing. Some players also really like the idea of helping a program reach new heights.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

My daughter has seen or played with some of the girls mentioned in the article. Stanford being #1 class this year is a no brainer when considering the 2020 redshirts. My daughter says Humphrey was the best 2020 attacker in spite of IL Women ranking her behind two other attack players. For some players, a top academic school is very important and that's nothing new. Some players aren't interested in being on the West coast but for some it's appealing. Some players also really like the idea of helping a program reach new heights.

The coach was doing a fantastic job at Dartmouth and I’m sure she will do a great job at Stanford. I would not be surprised to see them finish in the Top 10 on a regular basis.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

My daughter has seen or played with some of the girls mentioned in the article. Stanford being #1 class this year is a no brainer when considering the 2020 redshirts. My daughter says Humphrey was the best 2020 attacker in spite of IL Women ranking her behind two other attack players. For some players, a top academic school is very important and that's nothing new. Some players aren't interested in being on the West coast but for some it's appealing. Some players also really like the idea of helping a program reach new heights.

The coach was doing a fantastic job at Dartmouth and I’m sure she will do a great job at Stanford. I would not be surprised to see them finish in the Top 10 on a regular basis.

Screw Lacrosse. Congrats for the girls going to Stanford, what a degree they will have!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

My daughter has seen or played with some of the girls mentioned in the article. Stanford being #1 class this year is a no brainer when considering the 2020 redshirts. My daughter says Humphrey was the best 2020 attacker in spite of IL Women ranking her behind two other attack players. For some players, a top academic school is very important and that's nothing new. Some players aren't interested in being on the West coast but for some it's appealing. Some players also really like the idea of helping a program reach new heights.

The coach was doing a fantastic job at Dartmouth and I’m sure she will do a great job at Stanford. I would not be surprised to see them finish in the Top 10 on a regular basis.

Screw Lacrosse. Congrats for the girls going to Stanford, what a degree they will have!!

What degree is that. Soooo.... you know the Majors/Degrees these players are getting. Get off the Stanford cheer squad. We will see how they do when the season starts. At this point they have done nothing.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

My daughter has seen or played with some of the girls mentioned in the article. Stanford being #1 class this year is a no brainer when considering the 2020 redshirts. My daughter says Humphrey was the best 2020 attacker in spite of IL Women ranking her behind two other attack players. For some players, a top academic school is very important and that's nothing new. Some players aren't interested in being on the West coast but for some it's appealing. Some players also really like the idea of helping a program reach new heights.

The coach was doing a fantastic job at Dartmouth and I’m sure she will do a great job at Stanford. I would not be surprised to see them finish in the Top 10 on a regular basis.

Screw Lacrosse. Congrats for the girls going to Stanford, what a degree they will have!!

What degree is that. Soooo.... you know the Majors/Degrees these players are getting. Get off the Stanford cheer squad. We will see how they do when the season starts. At this point they have done nothing.

It’s not too difficult to see what degrees the girls are getting. Just go on their profiles and you can see. Stanford is the most selective school in the country, and getting in there is a life changing opportunity. Getting to play competitive lacrosse for an energetic, accomplished, and enthusiastic coach is the icing on the cake!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

My daughter has seen or played with some of the girls mentioned in the article. Stanford being #1 class this year is a no brainer when considering the 2020 redshirts. My daughter says Humphrey was the best 2020 attacker in spite of IL Women ranking her behind two other attack players. For some players, a top academic school is very important and that's nothing new. Some players aren't interested in being on the West coast but for some it's appealing. Some players also really like the idea of helping a program reach new heights.

The coach was doing a fantastic job at Dartmouth and I’m sure she will do a great job at Stanford. I would not be surprised to see them finish in the Top 10 on a regular basis.

Screw Lacrosse. Congrats for the girls going to Stanford, what a degree they will have!!

What degree is that. Soooo.... you know the Majors/Degrees these players are getting. Get off the Stanford cheer squad. We will see how they do when the season starts. At this point they have done nothing.

When will the jealousy end?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

My daughter has seen or played with some of the girls mentioned in the article. Stanford being #1 class this year is a no brainer when considering the 2020 redshirts. My daughter says Humphrey was the best 2020 attacker in spite of IL Women ranking her behind two other attack players. For some players, a top academic school is very important and that's nothing new. Some players aren't interested in being on the West coast but for some it's appealing. Some players also really like the idea of helping a program reach new heights.

The coach was doing a fantastic job at Dartmouth and I’m sure she will do a great job at Stanford. I would not be surprised to see them finish in the Top 10 on a regular basis.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

My daughter has seen or played with some of the girls mentioned in the article. Stanford being #1 class this year is a no brainer when considering the 2020 redshirts. My daughter says Humphrey was the best 2020 attacker in spite of IL Women ranking her behind two other attack players. For some players, a top academic school is very important and that's nothing new. Some players aren't interested in being on the West coast but for some it's appealing. Some players also really like the idea of helping a program reach new heights.

The coach was doing a fantastic job at Dartmouth and I’m sure she will do a great job at Stanford. I would not be surprised to see them finish in the Top 10 on a regular basis.

Also Stanford doesn’t have to play the top ACC or Big 10 teams making their schedule far easier to be ranked in the 10 ten.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

My daughter has seen or played with some of the girls mentioned in the article. Stanford being #1 class this year is a no brainer when considering the 2020 redshirts. My daughter says Humphrey was the best 2020 attacker in spite of IL Women ranking her behind two other attack players. For some players, a top academic school is very important and that's nothing new. Some players aren't interested in being on the West coast but for some it's appealing. Some players also really like the idea of helping a program reach new heights.

The coach was doing a fantastic job at Dartmouth and I’m sure she will do a great job at Stanford. I would not be surprised to see them finish in the Top 10 on a regular basis.

Screw Lacrosse. Congrats for the girls going to Stanford, what a degree they will have!!

19 players are undeclared. Please inform us of the life changing degrees they will receive. We will see them stat pad in a weak conference and then transfer back to east coast. The Stanford stuff is being driven by the same suffolk south shore contingent. I would take a service academy grad before a stanford grad any day.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

My daughter has seen or played with some of the girls mentioned in the article. Stanford being #1 class this year is a no brainer when considering the 2020 redshirts. My daughter says Humphrey was the best 2020 attacker in spite of IL Women ranking her behind two other attack players. For some players, a top academic school is very important and that's nothing new. Some players aren't interested in being on the West coast but for some it's appealing. Some players also really like the idea of helping a program reach new heights.

The coach was doing a fantastic job at Dartmouth and I’m sure she will do a great job at Stanford. I would not be surprised to see them finish in the Top 10 on a regular basis.

Screw Lacrosse. Congrats for the girls going to Stanford, what a degree they will have!!

What degree is that. Soooo.... you know the Majors/Degrees these players are getting. Get off the Stanford cheer squad. We will see how they do when the season starts. At this point they have done nothing.

Wow, what a miserable post. Why do you write such negative nonsense? IMHO, the kids who have the academic credentials and athletic ability to be offered and accept a spot at program/university like Stanford should be cheered, they have obviously worked extremely hard in the classroom as well as on the field and will be well positioned and prepared to excel in whatever path they choose after they graduate.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

My daughter has seen or played with some of the girls mentioned in the article. Stanford being #1 class this year is a no brainer when considering the 2020 redshirts. My daughter says Humphrey was the best 2020 attacker in spite of IL Women ranking her behind two other attack players. For some players, a top academic school is very important and that's nothing new. Some players aren't interested in being on the West coast but for some it's appealing. Some players also really like the idea of helping a program reach new heights.

The coach was doing a fantastic job at Dartmouth and I’m sure she will do a great job at Stanford. I would not be surprised to see them finish in the Top 10 on a regular basis.

Screw Lacrosse. Congrats for the girls going to Stanford, what a degree they will have!!

19 players are undeclared. Please inform us of the life changing degrees they will receive. We will see them stat pad in a weak conference and then transfer back to east coast. The Stanford stuff is being driven by the same suffolk south shore contingent. I would take a service academy grad before a stanford grad any day.

I would think that Stanford students do not declare their major until Junior year... regardless, your jealousy and bitterness come through loud and clear. Hopefully you have not passed your sour attitude on to your children.

I’m sure the stanford girls are really really great, ratings however, have as much to do with exposure at UAA, IL, ect., as others have said. A highly rated incoming class, as it says, incoming. my kids is at one of the 5 or so “ use lacrosse to get in” non-Ivy schools ( Stanford, NU, Duke, VU, Hopkins, maybe one or 2 others plus MIT and U Chicago @D3). The academics at her school, primarily in STEM is utterly brutal, bordering on demoralizing. Like many of these other girls at these 5 or so schools, never had less than an A. Much of my energy nowadays is spent helping her re-assess her approach to exams, focusing on class and exam specific test strategies, such as her speed in processing test questions (for instance one math test 11 questions with 10-12 parts/question and 90 minutes). When In season, at this point I won’t make any predictions on how her on field performance will go, with the academic responsibilities and demands looming large. I definitely wouldn’t base it on her HS performance.
Pac12 schedules don’t tend to help either, OOC games in particular

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I’m sure the stanford girls are really really great, ratings however, have as much to do with exposure at UAA, IL, ect., as others have said. A highly rated incoming class, as it says, incoming. my kids is at one of the 5 or so “ use lacrosse to get in” non-Ivy schools ( Stanford, NU, Duke, VU, Hopkins, maybe one or 2 others plus MIT and U Chicago @D3). The academics at her school, primarily in STEM is utterly brutal, bordering on demoralizing. Like many of these other girls at these 5 or so schools, never had less than an A. Much of my energy nowadays is spent helping her re-assess her approach to exams, focusing on class and exam specific test strategies, such as her speed in processing test questions (for instance one math test 11 questions with 10-12 parts/question and 90 minutes). When In season, at this point I won’t make any predictions on how her on field performance will go, with the academic responsibilities and demands looming large. I definitely wouldn’t base it on her HS performance.
Pac12 schedules don’t tend to help either, OOC games in particular

Your kid is at college and you are helping her with her exams? She can do it without you and will be better for it. And if she fails, she will learn a lot more than how to get things done with her parents help. I know first hand that they are brutal and lax is hard on top of it. I did it and my kid is doing it. Yours can too. Believe in her.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

My daughter has seen or played with some of the girls mentioned in the article. Stanford being #1 class this year is a no brainer when considering the 2020 redshirts. My daughter says Humphrey was the best 2020 attacker in spite of IL Women ranking her behind two other attack players. For some players, a top academic school is very important and that's nothing new. Some players aren't interested in being on the West coast but for some it's appealing. Some players also really like the idea of helping a program reach new heights.

The coach was doing a fantastic job at Dartmouth and I’m sure she will do a great job at Stanford. I would not be surprised to see them finish in the Top 10 on a regular basis.

Screw Lacrosse. Congrats for the girls going to Stanford, what a degree they will have!!

What degree is that. Soooo.... you know the Majors/Degrees these players are getting. Get off the Stanford cheer squad. We will see how they do when the season starts. At this point they have done nothing.

SEASON? Who cares? I'll tell you, nobody but the girls parents! Take the degree!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I’m sure the stanford girls are really really great, ratings however, have as much to do with exposure at UAA, IL, ect., as others have said. A highly rated incoming class, as it says, incoming. my kids is at one of the 5 or so “ use lacrosse to get in” non-Ivy schools ( Stanford, NU, Duke, VU, Hopkins, maybe one or 2 others plus MIT and U Chicago @D3). The academics at her school, primarily in STEM is utterly brutal, bordering on demoralizing. Like many of these other girls at these 5 or so schools, never had less than an A. Much of my energy nowadays is spent helping her re-assess her approach to exams, focusing on class and exam specific test strategies, such as her speed in processing test questions (for instance one math test 11 questions with 10-12 parts/question and 90 minutes). When In season, at this point I won’t make any predictions on how her on field performance will go, with the academic responsibilities and demands looming large. I definitely wouldn’t base it on her HS performance.
Pac12 schedules don’t tend to help either, OOC games in particular

Your kid is at college and you are helping her with her exams? She can do it without you and will be better for it. And if she fails, she will learn a lot more than how to get things done with her parents help. I know first hand that they are brutal and lax is hard on top of it. I did it and my kid is doing it. Yours can too. Believe in her.

As crazy as it sounds, yes there are parents out there who are still doing their kids work. Some are not even ashamed of it. Pathetic.

No I didn’t say I’m helping her with her exams. I said I’m helping her with strategy to take the Exam. How is that helping her with her exams? That’s entirely different, I think it’s more along the lines are you eating enough, getting done sleep?
She didn’t have a high school course dedicated to test prep, either; afaik all privates have those sorts of classes.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Looks like Stanford has been bringing in some pretty good players. I seem to remember someone posting that they do not get strong recruits.
I guess some people disagree.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/stanford-s-no-1-incoming-class-you-ve-gotta-believe/58682

Because, I think people are starting to “smarten up”! Use Lacrosse to get in the best academic school possible! Education first. Stanford is the best of both worlds with a top notch education.

My daughter has seen or played with some of the girls mentioned in the article. Stanford being #1 class this year is a no brainer when considering the 2020 redshirts. My daughter says Humphrey was the best 2020 attacker in spite of IL Women ranking her behind two other attack players. For some players, a top academic school is very important and that's nothing new. Some players aren't interested in being on the West coast but for some it's appealing. Some players also really like the idea of helping a program reach new heights.

The coach was doing a fantastic job at Dartmouth and I’m sure she will do a great job at Stanford. I would not be surprised to see them finish in the Top 10 on a regular basis.

Screw Lacrosse. Congrats for the girls going to Stanford, what a degree they will have!!

19 players are undeclared. Please inform us of the life changing degrees they will receive. We will see them stat pad in a weak conference and then transfer back to east coast. The Stanford stuff is being driven by the same suffolk south shore contingent. I would take a service academy grad before a stanford grad any day.

Green is such an ugly color.

Congratulations!!

Top 100

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/recruiting/girls?year=2021&position=all

Service Academy is 2nd to none. Those girls playing at Navy are the best of the best and deserve EVERONES praise and admiration. After that, tough to throw stones at a degree from ND, BC, Stanford and the like but if you are sending your kid to ACME college with an 800 SAT requirement because she got a few bucks from a coach you are CRAZY CRAZY CRAZY

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Congratulations!!

Top 100

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/recruiting/girls?year=2021&position=all

Looks like the bulk of the Top 50 went to the usual suspects (traditional top 20 programs)

6 - Maryland
4 - Virginia
4 - Duke
3 - Boston College
3 - Princeton
3 - Stanford
3 - North Carolina
2 - Florida
2 - Northwestern
2 - USC
2 - Loyola
2 - Notre Dame
2 - JMU
1 - Syracuse
1 - Penn State
1 - Penn
1 - Hopkins
1 - Navy
1 - Georgetown
1 - Ohio State
1 - Michigan
1 - Va Tech
1 - Harvard
1 - Yale
1 - Cornell

Forget lacrosse, that is an impressive list of schools.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Congratulations!!

Top 100

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/recruiting/girls?year=2021&position=all

Looks like the bulk of the Top 50 went to the usual suspects (traditional top 20 programs)

6 - Maryland
4 - Virginia
4 - Duke
3 - Boston College
3 - Princeton
3 - Stanford
3 - North Carolina
2 - Florida
2 - Northwestern
2 - USC
2 - Loyola
2 - Notre Dame
2 - JMU
1 - Syracuse
1 - Penn State
1 - Penn
1 - Hopkins
1 - Navy
1 - Georgetown
1 - Ohio State
1 - Michigan
1 - Va Tech
1 - Harvard
1 - Yale
1 - Cornell

Forget lacrosse, that is an impressive list of schools.

All great schools. I know some don’t put much stock in these lists but the programs that get the majority of these players year after year tend to out perform the programs that bring in few or none.

Looks like about 43 of the top 50 freshman are at top 20 caliber programs (including Hopkins and Navy in that group) .

Georgetown has brought in their fair share of high caliber players over the years but they have really fallen off from where they once were from a competitive standpoint.

Michigan has been tough the past few years and should continue to be in the Top 20 mix going forward.

Ohio State and Va Tech should probably follow the Notre Dame / Duke model with their out of conference schedule so they can make sure they have enough wins to get into the tournament.

Harvard, Yale and Cornell…. My money is on Harvard to make the jump to the next level and be in the discussion for Top 20. New Coach has only 2 full seasons under her belt, I believe she will do a good job and Harvard will become more competitive as a result.

Obviously in this day and age The Transfer Portal and additional eligibility plays a role in which teams will be most competitive (just look at BC don’t think they would have won The National Championship without transfers).

Maryland picked up a couple of big time transfers…
Expect to see them back in the Final Four this year.

Who ever put this list together doesn't watch much lacrosse

Gtown coach was USA coach before the new staff. That job takes a ton of time as HC. This takes away from other responsibilities, mostly because of lack of time.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Gtown coach was USA coach before the new staff. That job takes a ton of time as HC. This takes away from other responsibilities, mostly because of lack of time.

Stop.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Gtown coach was USA coach before the new staff. That job takes a ton of time as HC. This takes away from other responsibilities, mostly because of lack of time.

Stop.

So, I guess we can expect North Carolina to drop out of the Top 20.

No, UNC will not miss a beat.

Congratulations!!

USA

https://www.usalaxmagazine.com/usa-...es-roster-for-spring-premiere-in-florida

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Who ever put this list together doesn't watch much lacrosse

These are arguably the best programs and certainly some of the best coaches. All but Navy finish the season ranked in the Top 20 just about every year and many in finish in the Top 10 every year. Countless Final Four appearances, championship games and National Championships... although Navy is not Top 20 consistently they have gone to the Final Four recently and also finished in the top 10 recently and they have the most successful coach in the history of the sport. The only traditional top 10 - 20 program not on that list of schools is Stony Brook.

I think the coaches at the best programs know how to identify talent... and they seem to agree with Inside Lacrosse.

6 - Maryland
4 - Virginia
4 - Duke
3 - Boston College
3 - Princeton
3 - Stanford
3 - North Carolina
2 - Florida
2 - Northwestern
2 - USC
2 - Loyola
2 - Notre Dame
2 - JMU
1 - Syracuse
1 - Penn State
1 - Penn
1 - Hopkins
1 - Navy

Every time there is a list, team or ranking someone attempts to discredit it or knock the players named. The reality is that the majority of players who are named usually go to the best college programs and do very well. If these lists are not valid, why do these programs consistently outperform all other programs? Where do all of the players that you must believe to be better than the ones who get ranked go to school and why are those programs not doing better than the schools listed?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Service Academy is 2nd to none. Those girls playing at Navy are the best of the best and deserve EVERONES praise and admiration. After that, tough to throw stones at a degree from ND, BC, Stanford and the like but if you are sending your kid to ACME college with an 800 SAT requirement because she got a few bucks from a coach you are CRAZY CRAZY CRAZY

I don’t know if it’s jealousy or what but there are always haters trying to knock players, schools, programs etc…. I guess it’s some kind of defense mechanism.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Service Academy is 2nd to none. Those girls playing at Navy are the best of the best and deserve EVERONES praise and admiration. After that, tough to throw stones at a degree from ND, BC, Stanford and the like but if you are sending your kid to ACME college with an 800 SAT requirement because she got a few bucks from a coach you are CRAZY CRAZY CRAZY

I don’t know if it’s jealousy or what but there are always haters trying to knock players, schools, programs etc…. I guess it’s some kind of defense mechanism.

kid playing at apex tech in kalamazoo is she?

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/recruiting/girls?year=2023&position=all

Nice to see Clemson landing some talent...

Originally Posted by Anonymous

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/recruiting/girls?year=2023&position=all

Nice to see Clemson landing some talent...

Mostly the Usual suspects but nice to see Clemson getting off to a good start as well as Dartmouth picking up a couple and Va Tech too.

I think Clemson will hit the ground running in 2023 and Dartmouth could compete with Penn and Princeton for an Ivy League Championship in 2022.

And how are we judging talent?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And how are we judging talent?

Apparently judged from the IL experience. I don't recall any IL staff members walking around the summer or fall tournaments and taking notes.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And how are we judging talent?

Apparently judged from the IL experience. I don't recall any IL staff members walking around the summer or fall tournaments and taking notes.

They are partnered with alot of camps and events throughout the year. they basically get unlimited film. They send scouts when and where they can. Its expensive and covid didn't help so obviously they wont be everywhere "walking around taking notes" They talk to coaches. and they have their own events where they watch these girls up close. Their team has expanded significantly recently so they have more people working for them directly and indirectly. they do the best they can. and tbh i find their rankings to be pretty accurate overall. They are no different than any other recruting service out there so idk why people feel the need to take shots simply because their daughter wasn't ranked.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And how are we judging talent?

Apparently judged from the IL experience. I don't recall any IL staff members walking around the summer or fall tournaments and taking notes.

They are partnered with alot of camps and events throughout the year. they basically get unlimited film. They send scouts when and where they can. Its expensive and covid didn't help so obviously they wont be everywhere "walking around taking notes" They talk to coaches. and they have their own events where they watch these girls up close. Their team has expanded significantly recently so they have more people working for them directly and indirectly. they do the best they can. and tbh i find their rankings to be pretty accurate overall. They are no different than any other recruting service out there so idk why people feel the need to take shots simply because their daughter wasn't ranked.

“because their daughter wasn't ranked.”

That’s why the delusional parents try to tear down and diminish the players and the rankings.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And how are we judging talent?

Apparently judged from the IL experience. I don't recall any IL staff members walking around the summer or fall tournaments and taking notes.

Apparently? Why?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And how are we judging talent?

Apparently judged from the IL experience. I don't recall any IL staff members walking around the summer or fall tournaments and taking notes.

They are partnered with alot of camps and events throughout the year. they basically get unlimited film. They send scouts when and where they can. Its expensive and covid didn't help so obviously they wont be everywhere "walking around taking notes" They talk to coaches. and they have their own events where they watch these girls up close. Their team has expanded significantly recently so they have more people working for them directly and indirectly. they do the best they can. and tbh i find their rankings to be pretty accurate overall. They are no different than any other recruting service out there so idk why people feel the need to take shots simply because their daughter wasn't ranked.

Well said.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And how are we judging talent?

Apparently judged from the IL experience. I don't recall any IL staff members walking around the summer or fall tournaments and taking notes.

Apparently? Why?

there wasn’t anyone evaluating at IL experience either…

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And how are we judging talent?

Apparently judged from the IL experience. I don't recall any IL staff members walking around the summer or fall tournaments and taking notes.

Apparently? Why?

there wasn’t anyone evaluating at IL experience either…

Yes there was.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And how are we judging talent?

Apparently judged from the IL experience. I don't recall any IL staff members walking around the summer or fall tournaments and taking notes.

Apparently? Why?

there wasn’t anyone evaluating at IL experience either…

Yes there was.

No my daughter played in the event. Didn’t see one evaluator there unless the coaches did it.

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

And how are we judging talent?

Apparently judged from the IL experience. I don't recall any IL staff members walking around the summer or fall tournaments and taking notes.

Apparently? Why?

there wasn’t anyone evaluating at IL experience either…

Yes there was.

No my daughter played in the event. Didn’t see one evaluator there unless the coaches did it.

Some of you are nuts… do you walk around looking to see if someone is evaluating? IL has done a great job over the years with their Player Rankings. In most cases the college coaches from the most successful programs seem to agree with IL because in most cases the players who get ranked in the top 40 go to the best programs and most do very well.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

She also had her Cuse comrades there who were useless. Was definitely a money grab. Not a well organized event. And I don’t have sour grapes. My daughter played well and was recognized. We wouldn’t have done it, but my daughter insisted. A shame lax is such a $$$ entitled sport.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

She also had her Cuse comrades there who were useless. Was definitely a money grab. Not a well organized event. And I don’t have sour grapes. My daughter played well and was recognized. We wouldn’t have done it, but my daughter insisted. A shame lax is such a $$$ entitled sport.

Football is probably the only sport that isn’t a $$$ entitled spot?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

Most coaches will tell you it doesn’t take them very long to evaluate a players athleticism and ability. The coaches, especially the ones from the better programs can tell in less than a minute.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

Most coaches will tell you it doesn’t take them very long to evaluate a players athleticism and ability. The coaches, especially the ones from the better programs can tell in less than a minute.

If they are deciding on a recruit in a minute, then that fully explains how so many kids get overlooked and why so many kids who are hyped fizzle out. Yes they do get some right.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

Most coaches will tell you it doesn’t take them very long to evaluate a players athleticism and ability. The coaches, especially the ones from the better programs can tell in less than a minute.

If they are deciding on a recruit in a minute, then that fully explains how so many kids get overlooked and why so many kids who are hyped fizzle out. Yes they do get some right.

The post did not say that: "they are deciding on a recruit in a minute" it stated: "it doesn’t take them very long to evaluate a players athleticism and ability" and "The coaches, especially the ones from the better programs can tell in less than a minute".

Who they decide to recruit is something totally different, i.e. the coach may see that the player is fast enough, athletic enough and has good skill but happens to be lazy, selfish, has a low lacrosse IQ, bad attitude or whatever.

Your premise that "so many kids are overlooked" or "fizzle out" is simply not reality, not many kids are overlooked and not many fizzle out.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

Most coaches will tell you it doesn’t take them very long to evaluate a players athleticism and ability. The coaches, especially the ones from the better programs can tell in less than a minute.

If they are deciding on a recruit in a minute, then that fully explains how so many kids get overlooked and why so many kids who are hyped fizzle out. Yes they do get some right.

They get some right?? They get a lot more than some right, they get most right.

No coach gets all of their top recruits, not UNC, not BC, Not MD, not Northwestern, not Princeton, not ND, not Stanford, not UVA, not Florida, not Penn, not Syracuse. No Coach gets all of their top ranked/prioritized recruits. However, collectively they do not miss many. Do you actually believe that there are a lot of players who slip through the cracks and get overlooked? It doesn’t happen very often.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

Most coaches will tell you it doesn’t take them very long to evaluate a players athleticism and ability. The coaches, especially the ones from the better programs can tell in less than a minute.

If they are deciding on a recruit in a minute, then that fully explains how so many kids get overlooked and why so many kids who are hyped fizzle out. Yes they do get some right.

They get some right?? They get a lot more than some right, they get most right.

No coach gets all of their top recruits, not UNC, not BC, Not MD, not Northwestern, not Princeton, not ND, not Stanford, not UVA, not Florida, not Penn, not Syracuse. No Coach gets all of their top ranked/prioritized recruits. However, collectively they do not miss many. Do you actually believe that there are a lot of players who slip through the cracks and get overlooked? It doesn’t happen very often.

Yes I do believe that the top programs recruit players every year that sit the bench for 3-4 years and there are some players that are overlooked and do very well at programs not in the Top 20. If you can get the top top talent then it is fine that most of your recruiting class doesn't pan out. I do not think many top players get overlooked - no. I think it is more common that overhyped kids don't do well at top programs. Just what I've seen after going through it.

Preseason Poll

1. Boston College
2. North Carolina
3. Syracuse
4. Northwestern
5. Stony Brook
6. Maryland
7. Notre Dame
8. Duke
9. Loyola
10. Florida
11. Virginia
12. James Madison
13. Princeton
14. Stanford
15. Denver
16. Rutgers
17. Drexel
18. Jacksonville
19. UConn
20. Penn

Just about all of the usual suspects….
Some newcomers in Rutgers, Drexel, Jacksonville,
And UConn…. Let’s see how they do, my guess is Rutgers will be the only one out of the 4 to be ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season.

Syracuse too high…
Stony Brook too high…
Maryland too low…
Loyola a little high…
Princeton too low…
Denver a little low….
Rutgers a little low…
Penn to low…

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

Most coaches will tell you it doesn’t take them very long to evaluate a players athleticism and ability. The coaches, especially the ones from the better programs can tell in less than a minute.

If they are deciding on a recruit in a minute, then that fully explains how so many kids get overlooked and why so many kids who are hyped fizzle out. Yes they do get some right.

They get some right?? They get a lot more than some right, they get most right.

No coach gets all of their top recruits, not UNC, not BC, Not MD, not Northwestern, not Princeton, not ND, not Stanford, not UVA, not Florida, not Penn, not Syracuse. No Coach gets all of their top ranked/prioritized recruits. However, collectively they do not miss many. Do you actually believe that there are a lot of players who slip through the cracks and get overlooked? It doesn’t happen very often.

Yes I do believe that the top programs recruit players every year that sit the bench for 3-4 years and there are some players that are overlooked and do very well at programs not in the Top 20. If you can get the top top talent then it is fine that most of your recruiting class doesn't pan out. I do not think many top players get overlooked - no. I think it is more common that overhyped kids don't do well at top programs. Just what I've seen after going through it.

Of course there are players at the top programs who sit the bench, there are 30-40 players on the roster and most coaches only play 13 - 15 players in competitive games. Not everyone will see meaningful playing time and that is true at every program. Just because a player is doing well at a middle of the pack or weak program does not mean that the player was overlooked. It is much more difficult to get on the field at a top 10 - 20 program than it is to get on the field at a program that rarely if ever finishes the year in the top 20. Alyssa Parella and Erica Evans are the exception, not the rule, there are not many like them running around out there. There are many players at the top programs who you would say “didn’t pan out” that would walk right on to teams that are not traditional Top 20 teams and start and be one of the best players on the team. Case in point two Maryland players who saw very limited playing time during their 4 years with The Terps played their final year at Towson and I believe started every game and were two of Towson’s better players. Towson is a very good program BTW not a traditional top 20 but they do finish in the top 20 every few years , they are not middle of the road.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Preseason Poll

1. Boston College
2. North Carolina
3. Syracuse
4. Northwestern
5. Stony Brook
6. Maryland
7. Notre Dame
8. Duke
9. Loyola
10. Florida
11. Virginia
12. James Madison
13. Princeton
14. Stanford
15. Denver
16. Rutgers
17. Drexel
18. Jacksonville
19. UConn
20. Penn

Just about all of the usual suspects….
Some newcomers in Rutgers, Drexel, Jacksonville,
And UConn…. Let’s see how they do, my guess is Rutgers will be the only one out of the 4 to be ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season.

Syracuse too high…
Stony Brook too high…
Maryland too low…
Loyola a little high…
Princeton too low…
Denver a little low….
Rutgers a little low…
Penn to low…

Michigan will finish in the Top 20, doubtful that ND or Duke finish Top 10.

This is not good!

https://www.dailyprincetonian.com/a...nes-restricted-travel-covid-19-princeton

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

Most coaches will tell you it doesn’t take them very long to evaluate a players athleticism and ability. The coaches, especially the ones from the better programs can tell in less than a minute.

If they are deciding on a recruit in a minute, then that fully explains how so many kids get overlooked and why so many kids who are hyped fizzle out. Yes they do get some right.

They get some right?? They get a lot more than some right, they get most right.

No coach gets all of their top recruits, not UNC, not BC, Not MD, not Northwestern, not Princeton, not ND, not Stanford, not UVA, not Florida, not Penn, not Syracuse. No Coach gets all of their top ranked/prioritized recruits. However, collectively they do not miss many. Do you actually believe that there are a lot of players who slip through the cracks and get overlooked? It doesn’t happen very often.

Yes I do believe that the top programs recruit players every year that sit the bench for 3-4 years and there are some players that are overlooked and do very well at programs not in the Top 20. If you can get the top top talent then it is fine that most of your recruiting class doesn't pan out. I do not think many top players get overlooked - no. I think it is more common that overhyped kids don't do well at top programs. Just what I've seen after going through it.

Of course there are players at the top programs who sit the bench, there are 30-40 players on the roster and most coaches only play 13 - 15 players in competitive games. Not everyone will see meaningful playing time and that is true at every program. Just because a player is doing well at a middle of the pack or weak program does not mean that the player was overlooked. It is much more difficult to get on the field at a top 10 - 20 program than it is to get on the field at a program that rarely if ever finishes the year in the top 20. Alyssa Parella and Erica Evans are the exception, not the rule, there are not many like them running around out there. There are many players at the top programs who you would say “didn’t pan out” that would walk right on to teams that are not traditional Top 20 teams and start and be one of the best players on the team. Case in point two Maryland players who saw very limited playing time during their 4 years with The Terps played their final year at Towson and I believe started every game and were two of Towson’s better players. Towson is a very good program BTW not a traditional top 20 but they do finish in the top 20 every few years , they are not middle of the road.

This is a great response and said perfectly....well done

Club Lacrosse has a very limited pool of players, not many players get overlooked especially if the player is from a hot bed area such as Long Island. College coaches have the ability to watch just about all of the players play, it is rare that all of the coaches at the stronger programs will overlook a very strong player. Many parents will never admit this but it is reality. If a player does not play for a top club team it will be harder for that player but if the player can get in front of college coaches she most likely will not be overlooked if she is truly one of the stronger athletes/players.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

Most coaches will tell you it doesn’t take them very long to evaluate a players athleticism and ability. The coaches, especially the ones from the better programs can tell in less than a minute.

If they are deciding on a recruit in a minute, then that fully explains how so many kids get overlooked and why so many kids who are hyped fizzle out. Yes they do get some right.

They get some right?? They get a lot more than some right, they get most right.

No coach gets all of their top recruits, not UNC, not BC, Not MD, not Northwestern, not Princeton, not ND, not Stanford, not UVA, not Florida, not Penn, not Syracuse. No Coach gets all of their top ranked/prioritized recruits. However, collectively they do not miss many. Do you actually believe that there are a lot of players who slip through the cracks and get overlooked? It doesn’t happen very often.

I believe this to be true. I also agree that the college coaches do an excellent job identifying talent and very little of the talented players fall through the cracks in recruiting. On the flip side, there are definitely players that slip through the cracks during the travel lacrosse, lead into college process as it pertains to these rankings, lists etc.... Contrary to what many people believe, the "select teams" and "select lists" etc... that exist in every state, every region and nationally, are extremely political. You have so many coaches, directors, parents etc... pushing agendas, pulling favors, swinging power. So many people, so heavily and overly involved in the selection process for these things. Yet, for the most part the lists, teams, do reflect most of the best players. But this is where you will see some players fall through the cracks, but luckily it really doesn't matter because it is a system of checks and balances, so long as a player is recognized in recruiting. And yes, there are also a few players that get hyped up because of the "lists" and "teams" pushed through or over-inflated from the politics.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

Most coaches will tell you it doesn’t take them very long to evaluate a players athleticism and ability. The coaches, especially the ones from the better programs can tell in less than a minute.

If they are deciding on a recruit in a minute, then that fully explains how so many kids get overlooked and why so many kids who are hyped fizzle out. Yes they do get some right.

They get some right?? They get a lot more than some right, they get most right.

No coach gets all of their top recruits, not UNC, not BC, Not MD, not Northwestern, not Princeton, not ND, not Stanford, not UVA, not Florida, not Penn, not Syracuse. No Coach gets all of their top ranked/prioritized recruits. However, collectively they do not miss many. Do you actually believe that there are a lot of players who slip through the cracks and get overlooked? It doesn’t happen very often.

I believe this to be true. I also agree that the college coaches do an excellent job identifying talent and very little of the talented players fall through the cracks in recruiting. On the flip side, there are definitely players that slip through the cracks during the travel lacrosse, lead into college process as it pertains to these rankings, lists etc.... Contrary to what many people believe, the "select teams" and "select lists" etc... that exist in every state, every region and nationally, are extremely political. You have so many coaches, directors, parents etc... pushing agendas, pulling favors, swinging power. So many people, so heavily and overly involved in the selection process for these things. Yet, for the most part the lists, teams, do reflect most of the best players. But this is where you will see some players fall through the cracks, but luckily it really doesn't matter because it is a system of checks and balances, so long as a player is recognized in recruiting. And yes, there are also a few players that get hyped up because of the "lists" and "teams" pushed through or over-inflated from the politics.

Politics play a roll in life . But the fact remains there just aren’t that many “deserving” players who do not make the “select teams”.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

Most coaches will tell you it doesn’t take them very long to evaluate a players athleticism and ability. The coaches, especially the ones from the better programs can tell in less than a minute.

If they are deciding on a recruit in a minute, then that fully explains how so many kids get overlooked and why so many kids who are hyped fizzle out. Yes they do get some right.

They get some right?? They get a lot more than some right, they get most right.

No coach gets all of their top recruits, not UNC, not BC, Not MD, not Northwestern, not Princeton, not ND, not Stanford, not UVA, not Florida, not Penn, not Syracuse. No Coach gets all of their top ranked/prioritized recruits. However, collectively they do not miss many. Do you actually believe that there are a lot of players who slip through the cracks and get overlooked? It doesn’t happen very often.

I believe this to be true. I also agree that the college coaches do an excellent job identifying talent and very little of the talented players fall through the cracks in recruiting. On the flip side, there are definitely players that slip through the cracks during the travel lacrosse, lead into college process as it pertains to these rankings, lists etc.... Contrary to what many people believe, the "select teams" and "select lists" etc... that exist in every state, every region and nationally, are extremely political. You have so many coaches, directors, parents etc... pushing agendas, pulling favors, swinging power. So many people, so heavily and overly involved in the selection process for these things. Yet, for the most part the lists, teams, do reflect most of the best players. But this is where you will see some players fall through the cracks, but luckily it really doesn't matter because it is a system of checks and balances, so long as a player is recognized in recruiting. And yes, there are also a few players that get hyped up because of the "lists" and "teams" pushed through or over-inflated from the politics.

This. There are definitely awesome players that slip through the cracks. Which is understandable. These rankings are never meant to be perfect. no ranking ever is in anything. What annoys me is this constant annoying narrative from some parents that cry and call IL's rankings trash or garbage or meaningless because their daughter wasn't ranked. Then they point to a few rare cases where an underrated player rose to stardom and use that as justification but ignore all the highly ranked players who are constantly running and dominating D1 college lacrosse as solid to star players in their respective programs. which is the case 90% of time.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Alyssa Cometti is the person that evaluated the event. I believe she may of only watched half a game of each team live but all games were recorded. Also not all the ranked players played in the event.

Most coaches will tell you it doesn’t take them very long to evaluate a players athleticism and ability. The coaches, especially the ones from the better programs can tell in less than a minute.

If they are deciding on a recruit in a minute, then that fully explains how so many kids get overlooked and why so many kids who are hyped fizzle out. Yes they do get some right.

They get some right?? They get a lot more than some right, they get most right.

No coach gets all of their top recruits, not UNC, not BC, Not MD, not Northwestern, not Princeton, not ND, not Stanford, not UVA, not Florida, not Penn, not Syracuse. No Coach gets all of their top ranked/prioritized recruits. However, collectively they do not miss many. Do you actually believe that there are a lot of players who slip through the cracks and get overlooked? It doesn’t happen very often.

I believe this to be true. I also agree that the college coaches do an excellent job identifying talent and very little of the talented players fall through the cracks in recruiting. On the flip side, there are definitely players that slip through the cracks during the travel lacrosse, lead into college process as it pertains to these rankings, lists etc.... Contrary to what many people believe, the "select teams" and "select lists" etc... that exist in every state, every region and nationally, are extremely political. You have so many coaches, directors, parents etc... pushing agendas, pulling favors, swinging power. So many people, so heavily and overly involved in the selection process for these things. Yet, for the most part the lists, teams, do reflect most of the best players. But this is where you will see some players fall through the cracks, but luckily it really doesn't matter because it is a system of checks and balances, so long as a player is recognized in recruiting. And yes, there are also a few players that get hyped up because of the "lists" and "teams" pushed through or over-inflated from the politics.

Clubs have their reputations to protect as well. They aren’t pushing through players as “the best” , if they are not. They will not hype undeserving players to colleges for favors. It’s their clubs reputation on the line

Clubs have their reputations to protect as well. They aren’t pushing through players as “the best” , if they are not. They will not hype undeserving players to colleges for favors. It’s their clubs reputation on the line[/quote]

——————————————————————————

College coaches watch players with their own eyes, they evaluate the players and then make decisions on which players they are going to make offers to based on their assessment.

There are 10 to 15 college programs that consistently outperform the other 100 or so programs. Why is that? It is because they consistently bring in better players than the rest of the programs. These teams usually bring in 7 - 9 recruits per year, they don’t bring in players because they are “hyped” or because a club “pushed” the player, they bring the player in because they believe the player can help their team compete/win.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Preseason Poll

1. Boston College
2. North Carolina
3. Syracuse
4. Northwestern
5. Stony Brook
6. Maryland
7. Notre Dame
8. Duke
9. Loyola
10. Florida
11. Virginia
12. James Madison
13. Princeton
14. Stanford
15. Denver
16. Rutgers
17. Drexel
18. Jacksonville
19. UConn
20. Penn

Just about all of the usual suspects….
Some newcomers in Rutgers, Drexel, Jacksonville,
And UConn…. Let’s see how they do, my guess is Rutgers will be the only one out of the 4 to be ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season.

Syracuse too high…
Stony Brook too high…
Maryland too low…
Loyola a little high…
Princeton too low…
Denver a little low….
Rutgers a little low…
Penn to low…

Happy New Year!

The more I look at this the more the more I think BC and North Carolina are the only locks to make the Final Four.

Good luck to all!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Preseason Poll

1. Boston College
2. North Carolina
3. Syracuse
4. Northwestern
5. Stony Brook
6. Maryland
7. Notre Dame
8. Duke
9. Loyola
10. Florida
11. Virginia
12. James Madison
13. Princeton
14. Stanford
15. Denver
16. Rutgers
17. Drexel
18. Jacksonville
19. UConn
20. Penn

Just about all of the usual suspects….
Some newcomers in Rutgers, Drexel, Jacksonville,
And UConn…. Let’s see how they do, my guess is Rutgers will be the only one out of the 4 to be ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season.

Syracuse too high…
Stony Brook too high…
Maryland too low…
Loyola a little high…
Princeton too low…
Denver a little low….
Rutgers a little low…
Penn to low…

Happy New Year!

The more I look at this the more the more I think BC and North Carolina are the only locks to make the Final Four.

Good luck to all!

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

Easy there. Not “loaded” when compared to other top teams which have far more proven talent. New coach with no experience. They will not finish in the top 5

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

Very doubtful.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

When was the last time a first year head coach went to the Final Four? When was the lat time First year head coach made it to the championship game? When was the last time a first heard coach won a National Championship??

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

Easy there. Not “loaded” when compared to other top teams which have far more proven talent. New coach with no experience. They will not finish in the top 5

I tend to agree with this more so with regard to the new head coach. While I wish her well we really have no idea how she will perform in her new role. There is no question that Syracuse is one of the Top 10 programs but there are certainly other programs with a lot of talent as well. IMHO Syracuse will not be a Final Four Team in 2022.
Good chance at Top 10.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

When was the last time a first year head coach went to the Final Four? When was the lat time First year head coach made it to the championship game? When was the last time a first heard coach won a National Championship??

When was the last time you attended a spelling bee?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

When was the last time a first year head coach went to the Final Four? When was the lat time First year head coach made it to the championship game? When was the last time a first heard coach won a National Championship??

When was the last time you attended a spelling bee?

Lol .. that’s what you get when you text with one hand while waiting for the light to turn green 😁😁

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

Easy there. Not “loaded” when compared to other top teams which have far more proven talent. New coach with no experience. They will not finish in the top 5

No experience? Your kidding, right? “Loaded” is such a ridiculous word, but they certainly not struggling w/ talent. EH & MC will be back & EW has proven herself as a player. Clearly u don’t know much about the team.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

Easy there. Not “loaded” when compared to other top teams which have far more proven talent. New coach with no experience. They will not finish in the top 5

No experience? Your kidding, right? “Loaded” is such a ridiculous word, but they certainly not struggling w/ talent. EH & MC will be back & EW has proven herself as a player. Clearly u don’t know much about the team.

Pretty sure the poster was pointing out that Syracuse has a new head coach that has no head coaching experience. As far as talent goes, Syracuse obviously has talent as do the rest of the top programs. Games are played on the field, not on paper and coaching plays a major role in the outcome especially when competing against strong teams. I’m sure Syracuse will play a difficult schedule and they will be competitive, maybe they finish in the Top 10 but it is unlikely that they will make it to the Final Four.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

Easy there. Not “loaded” when compared to other top teams which have far more proven talent. New coach with no experience. They will not finish in the top 5

No experience? Your kidding, right? “Loaded” is such a ridiculous word, but they certainly not struggling w/ talent. EH & MC will be back & EW has proven herself as a player. Clearly u don’t know much about the team.

Pretty sure the poster was pointing out that Syracuse has a new head coach that has no head coaching experience. As far as talent goes, Syracuse obviously has talent as do the rest of the top programs. Games are played on the field, not on paper and coaching plays a major role in the outcome especially when competing against strong teams. I’m sure Syracuse will play a difficult schedule and they will be competitive, maybe they finish in the Top 10 but it is unlikely that they will make it to the Final Four.

Syracuse will definitely be battled tested come Tournament Time. The ACC is, as we know always tough but Syracuse has some solid teams on their out of conference schedule including Stanford, Stony Brook, Northwestern, Florida and Loyola. The Orange have three games in 8 days all on the road Virginia, Florida, Va Tech that could be challenging. The new coach has her work cut out for her, not an easy road to The Final Four for any team let alone a team with a rookie head coach. I believe she will be a good coach I just think there is always a learning curve.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

Easy there. Not “loaded” when compared to other top teams which have far more proven talent. New coach with no experience. They will not finish in the top 5

No experience? Your kidding, right? “Loaded” is such a ridiculous word, but they certainly not struggling w/ talent. EH & MC will be back & EW has proven herself as a player. Clearly u don’t know much about the team.

Everyone knows Syracuse has plenty of talent, they will finish the year in the Top 20 probably Top 10.

Which non traditional Top 20 teams have the best shot at surprising and finishing Top 20 this year? Will any crack the Top 10?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

Easy there. Not “loaded” when compared to other top teams which have far more proven talent. New coach with no experience. They will not finish in the top 5

No experience? Your kidding, right? “Loaded” is such a ridiculous word, but they certainly not struggling w/ talent. EH & MC will be back & EW has proven herself as a player. Clearly u don’t know much about the team.

Everyone knows Syracuse has plenty of talent, they will finish the year in the Top 20 probably Top 10.

Which non traditional Top 20 teams have the best shot at surprising and finishing Top 20 this year? Will any crack the Top 10?

Guess we will see soon enough!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

Easy there. Not “loaded” when compared to other top teams which have far more proven talent. New coach with no experience. They will not finish in the top 5

No experience? Your kidding, right? “Loaded” is such a ridiculous word, but they certainly not struggling w/ talent. EH & MC will be back & EW has proven herself as a player. Clearly u don’t know much about the team.

Everyone knows Syracuse has plenty of talent, they will finish the year in the Top 20 probably Top 10.

Which non traditional Top 20 teams have the best shot at surprising and finishing Top 20 this year? Will any crack the Top 10?

Guess we will see soon enough!

My money is on Villanova to be much improved and possibly finish Top 20.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Syracuse will be there, they are loaded, with both players and coaches.

Easy there. Not “loaded” when compared to other top teams which have far more proven talent. New coach with no experience. They will not finish in the top 5

No experience? Your kidding, right? “Loaded” is such a ridiculous word, but they certainly not struggling w/ talent. EH & MC will be back & EW has proven herself as a player. Clearly u don’t know much about the team.

Everyone knows Syracuse has plenty of talent, they will finish the year in the Top 20 probably Top 10.

Which non traditional Top 20 teams have the best shot at surprising and finishing Top 20 this year? Will any crack the Top 10?

Guess we will see soon enough!

My money is on Villanova to be much improved and possibly finish Top 20.

Ok that might be the funniest post I’ve seen on this site. Thank you.

----- "Ok that might be the funniest post I’ve seen on this site. Thank you." -----

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why?

Some very good players, Looks like UNC and MD did pretty well.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/15-biggest-impact-women-s-transfers-to-watch-in-2022/58764

Not sure how an article like this can miss an AA defender going to BC. Someone did not do their homework.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Not sure how an article like this can miss an AA defender going to BC. Someone did not do their homework.

Simple, we know from this site that defenders can't be impact players. Players can only be impactful if they Go To Goal...

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Duke & Notre Dame have both been playing a relatively weak non-conference schedule for years ( ND’s looks a little stronger this year). One reason they do it is to make sure they have at least a .500 record.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Weak is an understatement. Those first 6 games are doozies.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

Maryland on played Big 10 schedule last year. Big 10 hurt themselves last year by not playing out of conference games.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.[/quote

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.

Since leaving the ACC MD has played UNC and Cuse every season until the 21 season due to BIG guidelines. UMD wants no part of the ACC smoke. Trying to skate by with a week out of conference schedule to make sure of at large bid to the tournament. NW was a shoe in to win the BIG before Skane went down and probably still win it. If UMD was in the ACC last year wouldn’t of been above .500 and would have missed the tourney. Why they grabbed half a new starting lineup out the portal.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.[/quote

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.

Since leaving the ACC MD has played UNC and Cuse every season until the 21 season due to BIG guidelines. UMD wants no part of the ACC smoke. Trying to skate by with a week out of conference schedule to make sure of at large bid to the tournament. NW was a shoe in to win the BIG before Skane went down and probably still win it. If UMD was in the ACC last year wouldn’t of been above .500 and would have missed the tourney. Why they grabbed half a new starting lineup out the portal.

Yeah , Ok. Probably the densest post ever.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.[/quote

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.

Since leaving the ACC MD has played UNC and Cuse every season until the 21 season due to BIG guidelines. UMD wants no part of the ACC smoke. Trying to skate by with a week out of conference schedule to make sure of at large bid to the tournament. NW was a shoe in to win the BIG before Skane went down and probably still win it. If UMD was in the ACC last year wouldn’t of been above .500 and would have missed the tourney. Why they grabbed half a new starting lineup out the portal.

Maryland has dominated UNC over the past 10 seasons Maryland is something like 10 and 4 over UNC. I’m sure they have been even more dominant vs Syracuse.

Maybe it’s UNC and Syracuse who don’t want to play, maybe they are tired of getting beat repeatedly.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.

MD has always played Cuse -interesting that this is the first year that they are not!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.[/quote

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.

Since leaving the ACC MD has played UNC and Cuse every season until the 21 season due to BIG guidelines. UMD wants no part of the ACC smoke. Trying to skate by with a week out of conference schedule to make sure of at large bid to the tournament. NW was a shoe in to win the BIG before Skane went down and probably still win it. If UMD was in the ACC last year wouldn’t of been above .500 and would have missed the tourney. Why they grabbed half a new starting lineup out the portal.

Maryland has dominated UNC over the past 10 seasons Maryland is something like 10 and 4 over UNC. I’m sure they have been even more dominant vs Syracuse.

Maybe it’s UNC and Syracuse who don’t want to play, maybe they are tired of getting beat repeatedly.

Your post is all past tense. UMD is slipping in to mediocrity. Tried ducking Cuse two seasons ago with snowgate. Top recruits out side of Maryland have zero interest in going there.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.[/quote

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.

Since leaving the ACC MD has played UNC and Cuse every season until the 21 season due to BIG guidelines. UMD wants no part of the ACC smoke. Trying to skate by with a week out of conference schedule to make sure of at large bid to the tournament. NW was a shoe in to win the BIG before Skane went down and probably still win it. If UMD was in the ACC last year wouldn’t of been above .500 and would have missed the tourney. Why they grabbed half a new starting lineup out the portal.

Yeah , Ok. Probably the densest post ever.

Wow good comeback!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.[/quote

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.

Since leaving the ACC MD has played UNC and Cuse every season until the 21 season due to BIG guidelines. UMD wants no part of the ACC smoke. Trying to skate by with a week out of conference schedule to make sure of at large bid to the tournament. NW was a shoe in to win the BIG before Skane went down and probably still win it. If UMD was in the ACC last year wouldn’t of been above .500 and would have missed the tourney. Why they grabbed half a new starting lineup out the portal.

Maryland has dominated UNC over the past 10 seasons Maryland is something like 10 and 4 over UNC. I’m sure they have been even more dominant vs Syracuse.

Maybe it’s UNC and Syracuse who don’t want to play, maybe they are tired of getting beat repeatedly.

What games have you been watching?
MD didn’t want to come to Cuse a couple years back due to minimal snow, so Cuse went to MD & dominated!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.[/quote

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.

Since leaving the ACC MD has played UNC and Cuse every season until the 21 season due to BIG guidelines. UMD wants no part of the ACC smoke. Trying to skate by with a week out of conference schedule to make sure of at large bid to the tournament. NW was a shoe in to win the BIG before Skane went down and probably still win it. If UMD was in the ACC last year wouldn’t of been above .500 and would have missed the tourney. Why they grabbed half a new starting lineup out the portal.

Maryland has dominated UNC over the past 10 seasons Maryland is something like 10 and 4 over UNC. I’m sure they have been even more dominant vs Syracuse.

Maybe it’s UNC and Syracuse who don’t want to play, maybe they are tired of getting beat repeatedly.

What games have you been watching?
MD didn’t want to come to Cuse a couple years back due to minimal snow, so Cuse went to MD & dominated!

Actually Maryland is 8 and 6 vs UNC over the past 10 years.

Maryland is 11 - 2 vs Syracuse during that same 10 year period.

Syracuse is an also ran and will be lucky to be Top 10 this year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.[/quote

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.

Since leaving the ACC MD has played UNC and Cuse every season until the 21 season due to BIG guidelines. UMD wants no part of the ACC smoke. Trying to skate by with a week out of conference schedule to make sure of at large bid to the tournament. NW was a shoe in to win the BIG before Skane went down and probably still win it. If UMD was in the ACC last year wouldn’t of been above .500 and would have missed the tourney. Why they grabbed half a new starting lineup out the portal.

Yeah , Ok. Probably the densest post ever.

Wow good comeback!

I would call it an observation, possibly even a fact but certainly not a comeback.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.[/quote

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.

Since leaving the ACC MD has played UNC and Cuse every season until the 21 season due to BIG guidelines. UMD wants no part of the ACC smoke. Trying to skate by with a week out of conference schedule to make sure of at large bid to the tournament. NW was a shoe in to win the BIG before Skane went down and probably still win it. If UMD was in the ACC last year wouldn’t of been above .500 and would have missed the tourney. Why they grabbed half a new starting lineup out the portal.

Maryland has dominated UNC over the past 10 seasons Maryland is something like 10 and 4 over UNC. I’m sure they have been even more dominant vs Syracuse.

Maybe it’s UNC and Syracuse who don’t want to play, maybe they are tired of getting beat repeatedly.

Have you seen Syracuse schedule..... Doesn't look like they are ducking anyone

Funny watching people try to knock the best program in the history of the sport.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Funny watching people try to knock the best program in the history of the sport.

Lately they’ve been an embarrassment!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Funny watching people try to knock the best program in the history of the sport.

Lately they’ve been an embarrassment!

Ha… jealously is rampant on here… I thought green was only for St Patrick’s Day…

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Funny watching people try to knock the best program in the history of the sport.

Lately they’ve been an embarrassment!

Now you are embarrassing yourself, your comments are foolish.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Funny watching people try to knock the best program in the history of the sport.

Lately they’ve been an embarrassment!

Now you are embarrassing yourself, your comments are foolish.

Are you not aware of the scandals at Syracuse due to lax players misbehaving ? I can remind you if needed. Also, you claimed that Syracuse is the “best” in the history of lax. Facts are that Syracuse women have never won a championship. That’s not the best, sorry

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Funny watching people try to knock the best program in the history of the sport.

Lately they’ve been an embarrassment!

Now you are embarrassing yourself, your comments are foolish.

Are you not aware of the scandals at Syracuse due to lax players misbehaving ? I can remind you if needed. Also, you claimed that Syracuse is the “best” in the history of lax. Facts are that Syracuse women have never won a championship. That’s not the best, sorry

I Believe the poster is talking about md being the “best” in history and that may even be true. Again when you talk about md everything is past tense. Best in history or last 10years.. that roster is average at best last year below that. Not a top 25 player on the roster. IL always over ranks md recruits, really haven’t had a strong class in a few years. Top incoming recruits last year barely sniff the field. 22 class has the #1 recruit but let’s face it none of the last 5 classes have been great. Neither Cummins, Stukenburg, or Wittle and walking through the doors anytime soon.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.[/quote

Originally Posted by Anonymous

[quote=Anonymous]Why does Duke play such a weak schedule?? No wonder they can’t get out of their own way!

Teams have to be above 500 to make the NCAA tournament. Playing in the ACC is a difficult in conference schedule. MD dropped two Ls off this year’s schedule after almost missing it last year.

What "L's"? Maryland only played in conference games last year.

Since leaving the ACC MD has played UNC and Cuse every season until the 21 season due to BIG guidelines. UMD wants no part of the ACC smoke. Trying to skate by with a week out of conference schedule to make sure of at large bid to the tournament. NW was a shoe in to win the BIG before Skane went down and probably still win it. If UMD was in the ACC last year wouldn’t of been above .500 and would have missed the tourney. Why they grabbed half a new starting lineup out the portal.

Maryland has dominated UNC over the past 10 seasons Maryland is something like 10 and 4 over UNC. I’m sure they have been even more dominant vs Syracuse.

Maybe it’s UNC and Syracuse who don’t want to play, maybe they are tired of getting beat repeatedly.

Have you seen Syracuse schedule..... Doesn't look like they are ducking anyone

I have seen the Syracuse schedule… looks like they are ducking Maryland 😃

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Funny watching people try to knock the best program in the history of the sport.

Lately they’ve been an embarrassment!

Now you are embarrassing yourself, your comments are foolish.

Are you not aware of the scandals at Syracuse due to lax players misbehaving ? I can remind you if needed. Also, you claimed that Syracuse is the “best” in the history of lax. Facts are that Syracuse women have never won a championship. That’s not the best, sorry

I Believe the poster is talking about md being the “best” in history and that may even be true. Again when you talk about md everything is past tense. Best in history or last 10years.. that roster is average at best last year below that. Not a top 25 player on the roster. IL always over ranks md recruits, really haven’t had a strong class in a few years. Top incoming recruits last year barely sniff the field. 22 class has the #1 recruit but let’s face it none of the last 5 classes have been great. Neither Cummins, Stukenburg, or Wittle and walking through the doors anytime soon.

Simply put, that is an idiotic post.

There post seems pretty accurate to me. When was the last time the top player at Maryland wasn’t from Maryland. I’m from LI and most top players have zero interest in going to Maryland. As the sport grows heads more west and south it will effect schools like Maryland that don’t really have a national draw. Same reason SB will never get over the hump.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There post seems pretty accurate to me. When was the last time the top player at Maryland wasn’t from Maryland. I’m from LI and most top players have zero interest in going to Maryland. As the sport grows heads more west and south it will effect schools like Maryland that don’t really have a national draw. Same reason SB will never get over the hump.

Yeah only thing is your from Maryland Good try tho bud

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There post seems pretty accurate to me. When was the last time the top player at Maryland wasn’t from Maryland. I’m from LI and most top players have zero interest in going to Maryland. As the sport grows heads more west and south it will effect schools like Maryland that don’t really have a national draw. Same reason SB will never get over the hump.

Yeah only thing is your from Maryland Good try tho bud

There are probably less than 15 players from Long Island in any grad year that the Maryland Coaches would consider good enough to recruit. That said, players of that caliber can pretty much go to school wherever they want and there are a lot of options that are more attractive than The University of Maryland for a variety of reasons. For the top players from the state of Maryland the University provides a very good school / education at a very very affordable cost and an excellent lacrosse program. Maryland appears to have done pretty well with their formula for success.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There post seems pretty accurate to me. When was the last time the top player at Maryland wasn’t from Maryland. I’m from LI and most top players have zero interest in going to Maryland. As the sport grows heads more west and south it will effect schools like Maryland that don’t really have a national draw. Same reason SB will never get over the hump.

MD glory days are waning. The lacrosse scene is much more widespread than in the past. The best Girls have so many good choices now and any of the top 10 could be the best with the pickup of the right girls. MD could be moving down on a lot of girls list, because of better options for many other reasons than lacrosse. “The whole package”

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There post seems pretty accurate to me. When was the last time the top player at Maryland wasn’t from Maryland. I’m from LI and most top players have zero interest in going to Maryland. As the sport grows heads more west and south it will effect schools like Maryland that don’t really have a national draw. Same reason SB will never get over the hump.

MD glory days are waning. The lacrosse scene is much more widespread than in the past. The best Girls have so many good choices now and any of the top 10 could be the best with the pickup of the right girls. MD could be moving down on a lot of girls list, because of better options for many other reasons than lacrosse. “The whole package”

The lacrosse scene may be more widespread but it’s been pretty much the same 10 to 15 programs that get the lions share of the best players. They have been the same programs for the past 10 years or so and mostly the same for a lot longer than that.

As for Maryland’s glory days waning I would say that is wishful thinking by some.

Maryland will be just fine, I’m sure.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There post seems pretty accurate to me. When was the last time the top player at Maryland wasn’t from Maryland. I’m from LI and most top players have zero interest in going to Maryland. As the sport grows heads more west and south it will effect schools like Maryland that don’t really have a national draw. Same reason SB will never get over the hump.

MD glory days are waning. The lacrosse scene is much more widespread than in the past. The best Girls have so many good choices now and any of the top 10 could be the best with the pickup of the right girls. MD could be moving down on a lot of girls list, because of better options for many other reasons than lacrosse. “The whole package”

"MD glory days are waning." Thats funny, I have no Idea how Maryland will be this year but if I had to guess I would say they will be fine. This notion that the program that has dominated women's lacrosse for at least the past 40 years is somehow now going down the tube is laughable.

They have been in 7 of the past 10 championship games winning 4 National Championships during that time but now all of the sudden they are not going to be competitive?

The best girls have always had so many choices that is nothing new.

Didn't Maryland finish the year ranked 10th last year? Some of you talk as if they dropped out of the Top 20.

Chill, no one said “going down the tubes”! Look up the definition of “Waning”. Just saying times are a changing, glory days of domination is probably behind them! Lacrosse is way more widespread now. Other, and more schools have a lot to offer along with good lacrosse now. Lots more competition for the best players!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Chill, no one said “going down the tubes”! Look up the definition of “Waning”. Just saying times are a changing, glory days of domination is probably behind them! Lacrosse is way more widespread now. Other, and more schools have a lot to offer along with good lacrosse now. Lots more competition for the best players!

Disagree, for the most part the best players are going to the same schools. As for "waning" vs "going down the tubes" there absolutely have been people on here saying that Maryland "stinks" etc...

IMHO, when you look at the programs that consistently outperform the other 100 or so programs the best players have a lot of options and most of the time they choose one of the 15 - 20 programs that always seem to finish the year in the Top 20.

To me in simply comes down to whether MD is still getting the best 5 players in MD each year. For years it was just about automatic that the best players stayed home to be part of the amazing UMD tradition. If they no longer get the best of the best in the state that is a big issue because the out of state best players will rarely choose UMD. They have had an amazing advantage historically of keeping the best local kids - offering close to free education for in-state players was also a big advantage. If they don't get the Top 5 players each year they will start to look more and more like Stony Brook which is still a Top 15 school every year.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

To me in simply comes down to whether MD is still getting the best 5 players in MD each year. For years it was just about automatic that the best players stayed home to be part of the amazing UMD tradition. If they no longer get the best of the best in the state that is a big issue because the out of state best players will rarely choose UMD. They have had an amazing advantage historically of keeping the best local kids - offering close to free education for in-state players was also a big advantage. If they don't get the Top 5 players each year they will start to look more and more like Stony Brook which is still a Top 15 school every year.

Stony brook over UMD? Really? Why?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

To me in simply comes down to whether MD is still getting the best 5 players in MD each year. For years it was just about automatic that the best players stayed home to be part of the amazing UMD tradition. If they no longer get the best of the best in the state that is a big issue because the out of state best players will rarely choose UMD. They have had an amazing advantage historically of keeping the best local kids - offering close to free education for in-state players was also a big advantage. If they don't get the Top 5 players each year they will start to look more and more like Stony Brook which is still a Top 15 school every year.

I’m willing to bet that Maryland has finished outside the Top 10 less than 5 times over the past 40 years. They won one of the past 2 National Championships obviously they are bringing in good players and there is no reason to believe that they will not continue to do so. As for “the best 5 players in state of MD” that’s not even possible to accurately assess, ranking of players is opinion based. MD will continue to bring in talent and they will continue to be one of the best programs.

We'll see. This could be the 3rd sub-par year in a row by UMD standards. UMD and BC were both bad in the first Covid Year (2019). BC bounced back in a big way. UMD may bounce back a bit due to 5th year transfers but that is just a band aid. See UNC and BC continuing as perennial Final Four Teams. Just don't see that being the case for UMD. Historically they have just been better than all other teams - better and deeper due to the in state tuition benefit. Stony Brook has largely excelled due to coaching whereas UMD largely excelled based on talent. JMO.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We'll see. This could be the 3rd sub-par year in a row by UMD standards. UMD and BC were both bad in the first Covid Year (2019). BC bounced back in a big way. UMD may bounce back a bit due to 5th year transfers but that is just a band aid. See UNC and BC continuing as perennial Final Four Teams. Just don't see that being the case for UMD. Historically they have just been better than all other teams - better and deeper due to the in state tuition benefit. Stony Brook has largely excelled due to coaching whereas UMD largely excelled based on talent. JMO.

Maryland won the National Championship in 2019.

In 2020 Maryland was ranked 11 in the final poll of the Covid shortened season.

In 2021 Maryland finished the year ranked 10th.

Do you really consider that bad?

Not sure why Stony Brook was brought into the conversation but Stony Brook has had plenty of talent for many years now. Comparing Stony Brook and Maryland is an apples & oranges comparison with respect to the schools and the lacrosse programs.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We'll see. This could be the 3rd sub-par year in a row by UMD standards. UMD and BC were both bad in the first Covid Year (2019). BC bounced back in a big way. UMD may bounce back a bit due to 5th year transfers but that is just a band aid. See UNC and BC continuing as perennial Final Four Teams. Just don't see that being the case for UMD. Historically they have just been better than all other teams - better and deeper due to the in state tuition benefit. Stony Brook has largely excelled due to coaching whereas UMD largely excelled based on talent. JMO.

Maryland has been to the Final Four 31 times since 1978 they will have an off year from time to time (as will all programs) but this nonsense that they will not be one of the top programs any longer is a bit ridicules.

By UMD standards being ranked in the #8 - #11 range is awful especially if it happens for 2-3 consecutive years. Keep in mind that there is a HUGE difference between being a Final Four Team and #8 - #11. There is actually a huge drop-off after about #6 in the country. ND was ranked around #6 last year and they suffered running clock losses to UNC and BC at the end of the year. MD should not be celebrating any ranking worse than #8 in my opinion. At that level they simply are not competitive with the best teams. I don't think Alabama or Clemson celebrate being anything but a Final Four Team. JMO

Originally Posted by Anonymous

By UMD standards being ranked in the #8 - #11 range is awful especially if it happens for 2-3 consecutive years. Keep in mind that there is a HUGE difference between being a Final Four Team and #8 - #11. There is actually a huge drop-off after about #6 in the country. ND was ranked around #6 last year and they suffered running clock losses to UNC and BC at the end of the year. MD should not be celebrating any ranking worse than #8 in my opinion. At that level they simply are not competitive with the best teams. I don't think Alabama or Clemson celebrate being anything but a Final Four Team. JMO

BC traded places with MD. Fact!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

By UMD standards being ranked in the #8 - #11 range is awful especially if it happens for 2-3 consecutive years. Keep in mind that there is a HUGE difference between being a Final Four Team and #8 - #11. There is actually a huge drop-off after about #6 in the country. ND was ranked around #6 last year and they suffered running clock losses to UNC and BC at the end of the year. MD should not be celebrating any ranking worse than #8 in my opinion. At that level they simply are not competitive with the best teams. I don't think Alabama or Clemson celebrate being anything but a Final Four Team. JMO

BC traded places with MD. Fact!

If you take lacrosse out of the equation, Maryland is barely a desirable school. BC is a much better option on many levels, and now add a better option as far as lacrosse as well, we will see for how long.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

By UMD standards being ranked in the #8 - #11 range is awful especially if it happens for 2-3 consecutive years. Keep in mind that there is a HUGE difference between being a Final Four Team and #8 - #11. There is actually a huge drop-off after about #6 in the country. ND was ranked around #6 last year and they suffered running clock losses to UNC and BC at the end of the year. MD should not be celebrating any ranking worse than #8 in my opinion. At that level they simply are not competitive with the best teams. I don't think Alabama or Clemson celebrate being anything but a Final Four Team. JMO

Oh please. Take a look at BC, they finished the year at 19 in 2020 with basically the same exact team. They were blown out by UNC & Syracuse in 2021 and yet were able to win the NC . Not much difference between the Top 10 or so.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

By UMD standards being ranked in the #8 - #11 range is awful especially if it happens for 2-3 consecutive years. Keep in mind that there is a HUGE difference between being a Final Four Team and #8 - #11. There is actually a huge drop-off after about #6 in the country. ND was ranked around #6 last year and they suffered running clock losses to UNC and BC at the end of the year. MD should not be celebrating any ranking worse than #8 in my opinion. At that level they simply are not competitive with the best teams. I don't think Alabama or Clemson celebrate being anything but a Final Four Team. JMO

BC traded places with MD. Fact!

If you take lacrosse out of the equation, Maryland is barely a desirable school. BC is a much better option on many levels, and now add a better option as far as lacrosse as well, we will see for how long.

UMD is very hard to get into, it’s one of the top public universities in nation, is miles from the most powerful city in the world and has one of the top journalism and engineering programs around.

Yes, College Park is undesirable.

Kids also seem to like going south in many cases, maybe it’s weather related but they do a solid job of attracting NJ NY down there.

BC great school but it’s not for everyone.

That’s ridiculous saying not much difference in the top 10. I agree BC hit their stride at the right time, but UMD was not in the conversation last year. Now if you said not much difference in the top 4 that would be different

Originally Posted by Anonymous

By UMD standards being ranked in the #8 - #11 range is awful especially if it happens for 2-3 consecutive years. Keep in mind that there is a HUGE difference between being a Final Four Team and #8 - #11. There is actually a huge drop-off after about #6 in the country. ND was ranked around #6 last year and they suffered running clock losses to UNC and BC at the end of the year. MD should not be celebrating any ranking worse than #8 in my opinion. At that level they simply are not competitive with the best teams. I don't think Alabama or Clemson celebrate being anything but a Final Four Team. JMO

BC traded places with MD. Fact!

If you take lacrosse out of the equation, Maryland is barely a desirable school. BC is a much better option on many levels, and now add a better option as far as lacrosse as well, we will see for how long.

UMD is very hard to get into, it’s one of the top public universities in nation, is miles from the most powerful city in the world and has one of the top journalism and engineering programs around.

Yes, College Park is undesirable.

Kids also seem to like going south in many cases, maybe it’s weather related but they do a solid job of attracting NJ NY down there.

BC great school but it’s not for everyone.

Go West, young women! Up and coming!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

By UMD standards being ranked in the #8 - #11 range is awful especially if it happens for 2-3 consecutive years. Keep in mind that there is a HUGE difference between being a Final Four Team and #8 - #11. There is actually a huge drop-off after about #6 in the country. ND was ranked around #6 last year and they suffered running clock losses to UNC and BC at the end of the year. MD should not be celebrating any ranking worse than #8 in my opinion. At that level they simply are not competitive with the best teams. I don't think Alabama or Clemson celebrate being anything but a Final Four Team. JMO

BC traded places with MD. Fact!

If you take lacrosse out of the equation, Maryland is barely a desirable school. BC is a much better option on many levels, and now add a better option as far as lacrosse as well, we will see for how long.

UMD is very hard to get into, it’s one of the top public universities in nation, is miles from the most powerful city in the world and has one of the top journalism and engineering programs around.

Yes, College Park is undesirable.

Kids also seem to like going south in many cases, maybe it’s weather related but they do a solid job of attracting NJ NY down there.

BC great school but it’s not for everyone.

Both good schools with great lacrosse. Both will continue to thrive but obviously there are a lot of options for the top players and many are stronger academically. To each their w own.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

By UMD standards being ranked in the #8 - #11 range is awful especially if it happens for 2-3 consecutive years. Keep in mind that there is a HUGE difference between being a Final Four Team and #8 - #11. There is actually a huge drop-off after about #6 in the country. ND was ranked around #6 last year and they suffered running clock losses to UNC and BC at the end of the year. MD should not be celebrating any ranking worse than #8 in my opinion. At that level they simply are not competitive with the best teams. I don't think Alabama or Clemson celebrate being anything but a Final Four Team. JMO

BC traded places with MD. Fact!

If you take lacrosse out of the equation, Maryland is barely a desirable school. BC is a much better option on many levels, and now add a better option as far as lacrosse as well, we will see for how long.

Time will tell but I would not bet against Maryland. The Terps may have off years from time to time but I’m sure they will continue to be one of the top programs.

As for BC being a much better option on many levels that’s all opinion and really irrelevant because MD & BC are not the only options.
The strongest players will be recruited by most if not all of the strongest programs. It’s a diverse group of schools so most of the top players will be able to find a good fit at one of them.

Nothing wrong with BC but when you look at the Top 10 - 20 programs there are many options that a lot of recruits will find more attractive for a variety of reasons.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That’s ridiculous saying not much difference in the top 10. I agree BC hit their stride at the right time, but UMD was not in the conversation last year. Now if you said not much difference in the top 4 that would be different

Duke finished the year ranked # 8…. The lost to UNC by 1, they lost to BC by 2…. I would say not much difference there. Maryland finished ranked #10 and they lost to Duke by 1 … again, not much of a difference. Any given day.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There post seems pretty accurate to me. When was the last time the top player at Maryland wasn’t from Maryland. I’m from LI and most top players have zero interest in going to Maryland. As the sport grows heads more west and south it will effect schools like Maryland that don’t really have a national draw. Same reason SB will never get over the hump.

Marylands's top 22 recruit played on Yellow Jackets. While not from LI, she was from Minnesota. Shows they still have a national draw.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That’s ridiculous saying not much difference in the top 10. I agree BC hit their stride at the right time, but UMD was not in the conversation last year. Now if you said not much difference in the top 4 that would be different

Duke finished the year ranked # 8…. The lost to UNC by 1, they lost to BC by 2…. I would say not much difference there. Maryland finished ranked #10 and they lost to Duke by 1 … again, not much of a difference. Any given day.

Duke also lost 6-13 to UNC 5-15 to Cuse 10-22 to Northwestern They are not even close to those teams

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That’s ridiculous saying not much difference in the top 10. I agree BC hit their stride at the right time, but UMD was not in the conversation last year. Now if you said not much difference in the top 4 that would be different

Duke finished the year ranked # 8…. The lost to UNC by 1, they lost to BC by 2…. I would say not much difference there. Maryland finished ranked #10 and they lost to Duke by 1 … again, not much of a difference. Any given day.

Duke also lost 6-13 to UNC 5-15 to Cuse 10-22 to Northwestern They are not even close to those teams

BC lost to UNC by 11, there was a running clock early second half… the final was 21 - 9

BC lost to Syracuse by by 9 … they were down 8-1 in the first half, the game was never close the Final was 16 - 7.

BC struggled with Duke it was a 1 goal game with 3 minutes to go… final 17-15 … that is close.

Sorry, you can’t have it both ways. Any given day.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There post seems pretty accurate to me. When was the last time the top player at Maryland wasn’t from Maryland. I’m from LI and most top players have zero interest in going to Maryland. As the sport grows heads more west and south it will effect schools like Maryland that don’t really have a national draw. Same reason SB will never get over the hump.

Marylands's top 22 recruit played on Yellow Jackets. While not from LI, she was from Minnesota. Shows they still have a national draw.

Of course they do, very good school and a great lacrosse program. I have not met too many Maryland Alum who did not have a very positive experience.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That’s ridiculous saying not much difference in the top 10. I agree BC hit their stride at the right time, but UMD was not in the conversation last year. Now if you said not much difference in the top 4 that would be different

Duke finished the year ranked # 8…. The lost to UNC by 1, they lost to BC by 2…. I would say not much difference there. Maryland finished ranked #10 and they lost to Duke by 1 … again, not much of a difference. Any given day.

Duke also lost 6-13 to UNC 5-15 to Cuse 10-22 to Northwestern They are not even close to those teams

BC lost to UNC by 11, there was a running clock early second half… the final was 21 - 9

BC lost to Syracuse by by 9 … they were down 8-1 in the first half, the game was never close the Final was 16 - 7.

BC struggled with Duke it was a 1 goal game with 3 minutes to go… final 17-15 … that is close.

Sorry, you can’t have it both ways. Any given day.

If Charlotte North stays at Duke, they win Natty. She goes to BC and they win Natty. Probably the only current player with that kind of impact.

A lot of Schools with women’s lacrosse here.,.

Maybe this will force these universities to make attending more affordable to middle class / income kids.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna11643

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There post seems pretty accurate to me. When was the last time the top player at Maryland wasn’t from Maryland. I’m from LI and most top players have zero interest in going to Maryland. As the sport grows heads more west and south it will effect schools like Maryland that don’t really have a national draw. Same reason SB will never get over the hump.

Marylands's top 22 recruit played on Yellow Jackets. While not from LI, she was from Minnesota. Shows they still have a national draw.

Yes anyone could see why Baltimore is a beautiful city.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

There post seems pretty accurate to me. When was the last time the top player at Maryland wasn’t from Maryland. I’m from LI and most top players have zero interest in going to Maryland. As the sport grows heads more west and south it will effect schools like Maryland that don’t really have a national draw. Same reason SB will never get over the hump.

Marylands's top 22 recruit played on Yellow Jackets. While not from LI, she was from Minnesota. Shows they still have a national draw.

Yes anyone could see why Baltimore is a beautiful city.

You think UMD is in Baltimore do you?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That’s ridiculous saying not much difference in the top 10. I agree BC hit their stride at the right time, but UMD was not in the conversation last year. Now if you said not much difference in the top 4 that would be different

Duke finished the year ranked # 8…. The lost to UNC by 1, they lost to BC by 2…. I would say not much difference there. Maryland finished ranked #10 and they lost to Duke by 1 … again, not much of a difference. Any given day.

Duke also lost 6-13 to UNC 5-15 to Cuse 10-22 to Northwestern They are not even close to those teams

BC lost to UNC by 11, there was a running clock early second half… the final was 21 - 9

BC lost to Syracuse by by 9 … they were down 8-1 in the first half, the game was never close the Final was 16 - 7.

BC struggled with Duke it was a 1 goal game with 3 minutes to go… final 17-15 … that is close.

Sorry, you can’t have it both ways. Any given day.

If Charlotte North stays at Duke, they win Natty. She goes to BC and they win Natty. Probably the only current player with that kind of impact.

No way. She played two years at Duke and they didn’t even make the NCAA tournament! She was really good at Duke from day one, one of their best if not the best player on their roster.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That’s ridiculous saying not much difference in the top 10. I agree BC hit their stride at the right time, but UMD was not in the conversation last year. Now if you said not much difference in the top 4 that would be different

Duke finished the year ranked # 8…. The lost to UNC by 1, they lost to BC by 2…. I would say not much difference there. Maryland finished ranked #10 and they lost to Duke by 1 … again, not much of a difference. Any given day.

Duke also lost 6-13 to UNC 5-15 to Cuse 10-22 to Northwestern They are not even close to those teams

BC lost to UNC by 11, there was a running clock early second half… the final was 21 - 9

BC lost to Syracuse by by 9 … they were down 8-1 in the first half, the game was never close the Final was 16 - 7.

BC struggled with Duke it was a 1 goal game with 3 minutes to go… final 17-15 … that is close.

Sorry, you can’t have it both ways. Any given day.

If Charlotte North stays at Duke, they win Natty. She goes to BC and they win Natty. Probably the only current player with that kind of impact.

It's a team sport... She was at Duke for two years and I do not believe Duke finished in the Top 20. She was at BC in 2020 and they finished the season Ranked 19. Obviously a great player that would help any team but it takes a lot more than 1 player to win a National Championship.

The only way to beat BC is to put a shut off on North. Look at the teams that did and were very successful when even completely overmatched. Louisville game1, Syracuse in dome SU win easy and UVA second game.(I realize they destroyed Louisville game 2) . She is an amazing player. You can’t let that great of a player have her comfort zone. Even if she gets out of shut off most likely going to be getting ball in different then place then where she loves to attack from the right side. If she can do that she causes many problem with slides and Bc great ball movement. BTW this isn’t any enlightening strategy to be honest but many don’t do it. Must be a pride thing.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The only way to beat BC is to put a shut off on North. Look at the teams that did and were very successful when even completely overmatched. Louisville game1, Syracuse in dome SU win easy and UVA second game.(I realize they destroyed Louisville game 2) . She is an amazing player. You can’t let that great of a player have her comfort zone. Even if she gets out of shut off most likely going to be getting ball in different then place then where she loves to attack from the right side. If she can do that she causes many problem with slides and Bc great ball movement. BTW this isn’t any enlightening strategy to be honest but many don’t do it. Must be a pride thing.

What you are saying is: Defense Wins.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The only way to beat BC is to put a shut off on North. Look at the teams that did and were very successful when even completely overmatched. Louisville game1, Syracuse in dome SU win easy and UVA second game.(I realize they destroyed Louisville game 2) . She is an amazing player. You can’t let that great of a player have her comfort zone. Even if she gets out of shut off most likely going to be getting ball in different then place then where she loves to attack from the right side. If she can do that she causes many problem with slides and Bc great ball movement. BTW this isn’t any enlightening strategy to be honest but many don’t do it. Must be a pride thing.

What you are saying is: Defense Wins.

Yup! If they can’t score, they can’t win!

Defense wins championships” - (Coach Bear Bryant)

I have no idea how Maryland or any other team will perform this season. However, looking back over the past 10 seasons not a lot has changed. There have been a total of 40 programs that have finished the season ranked in the Top 20.

20 programs have finished the season ranked in the Top 20 five times or more over the past 10 seasons. They are:

10 - UNC
10 - Maryland
10 - Boston College
10 - Northwestern
10 - Florida
10 - Virginia
10 - Syracuse
10 - Princeton (actual 9, they did not compete in 2021 but no reason to believe they would not have been top 20)
10 - Penn (see Princeton above :-) )

9 - Stony Brook
9 - Notre Dame

8 - Loyola

7 - Penn State
7 - UMass

6 - Duke
6 - JMU
6 - Denver

5 - Stanford
5 - Dartmouth
5 - Hopkins

Several teams have finished 1 X and some others 2 or 3 times but none are consistently ranked.

Looking at just the past 5 seasons not much has changed...

36 programs have finished the season ranked in the Top 20 over the past 5 years.

22 of those programs have finished in the Top 20 more than once during that 5 years. They are:

5 - UNC
5 - Maryland
5 - Boston College
5 - Northwestern
5 - Florida
5 - Virginia
5 - Syracuse
5 - Princeton (see above)
5 - Penn ( see above)
5 - JMU
5 - Stony Brook

4 - Notre Dame
4 - Loyola
4 - Denver

3 - UMass
3 - Navy
3 - Colorado

3 - Dartmouth (see Penn and Princeton above)

2 - Stanford
2 - Michigan
2 - USC
2 - Duke

Penn State and Hopkins have fallen off a bit while Navy, Colorado, USC and Michigan appear to be on the rise.

Will Boston College be the next program to go on a run? Only time will tell.

BC will be a Final Four Team with and without CN the next 3 years, just like they were for 3 straight years before CN. Their 2020-2023 classes are loaded and their defense will be the best they have ever had the next 3 years. People forget that BC was awful with CN in 2019 and they beat UNC last year on a day when CN was very average. CN is the best player in the sport but there is much more to the BC team. JMO

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I have no idea how Maryland or any other team will perform this season. However, looking back over the past 10 seasons not a lot has changed. There have been a total of 40 programs that have finished the season ranked in the Top 20.

20 programs have finished the season ranked in the Top 20 five times or more over the past 10 seasons. They are:

10 - UNC
10 - Maryland
10 - Boston College
10 - Northwestern
10 - Florida
10 - Virginia
10 - Syracuse
10 - Princeton (actual 9, they did not compete in 2021 but no reason to believe they would not have been top 20)
10 - Penn (see Princeton above :-) )

9 - Stony Brook
9 - Notre Dame

8 - Loyola

7 - Penn State
7 - UMass

6 - Duke
6 - JMU
6 - Denver

5 - Stanford
5 - Dartmouth
5 - Hopkins

Several teams have finished 1 X and some others 2 or 3 times but none are consistently ranked.

Looking at just the past 5 seasons not much has changed...

36 programs have finished the season ranked in the Top 20 over the past 5 years.

22 of those programs have finished in the Top 20 more than once during that 5 years. They are:

5 - UNC
5 - Maryland
5 - Boston College
5 - Northwestern
5 - Florida
5 - Virginia
5 - Syracuse
5 - Princeton (see above)
5 - Penn ( see above)
5 - JMU
5 - Stony Brook

4 - Notre Dame
4 - Loyola
4 - Denver

3 - UMass
3 - Navy
3 - Colorado

3 - Dartmouth (see Penn and Princeton above)

2 - Stanford
2 - Michigan
2 - USC
2 - Duke

Penn State and Hopkins have fallen off a bit while Navy, Colorado, USC and Michigan appear to be on the rise.

Will Boston College be the next program to go on a run? Only time will tell.

UMass & Denver do not get enough credit. They are very good programs.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

BC will be a Final Four Team with and without CN the next 3 years, just like they were for 3 straight years before CN. Their 2020-2023 classes are loaded and their defense will be the best they have ever had the next 3 years. People forget that BC was awful with CN in 2019 and they beat UNC last year on a day when CN was very average. CN is the best player in the sport but there is much more to the BC team. JMO

Why don’t we just crown them National Champs?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

BC will be a Final Four Team with and without CN the next 3 years, just like they were for 3 straight years before CN. Their 2020-2023 classes are loaded and their defense will be the best they have ever had the next 3 years. People forget that BC was awful with CN in 2019 and they beat UNC last year on a day when CN was very average. CN is the best player in the sport but there is much more to the BC team. JMO

Wow someone that finally watches the sport and doesn’t just spew BS.

CN didn’t have an average game versus NC. She actually had an outstanding game as she played very smart lacrosse. She drove from her right hand side and created the slide. Instead of trying to beat the double team she moved the ball which created offense for the BC team which was very well schooled and prepared for what was going to happen. BC has very good players that then took it from there. But without the slide CN created that was the start of it. She also had a huge momentum changing goal in that game. It is the little things she does that great big things.

Now you are losing credibility. An "outstanding game" by CN standards if not 2 for 8 shooting and zero draw controls no matter how you spin it. Beating UNC was an absolute team win and it was the defense, caused turnovers and great goal keeping that won the game. Best player in the sport but BC plays the ultimate, unselfish team game and have big game players and coaches.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Now you are losing credibility. An "outstanding game" by CN standards if not 2 for 8 shooting and zero draw controls no matter how you spin it. Beating UNC was an absolute team win and it was the defense, caused turnovers and great goal keeping that won the game. Best player in the sport but BC plays the ultimate, unselfish team game and have big game players and coaches.

Biggest difference in the game was saves.

Agree total team effort.

Team Defense is what wins… redefining, 7 v 7 Defense and goalie play.

BC will obviously be competitive but so will many other teams.

That’s why they play the games.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Now you are losing credibility. An "outstanding game" by CN standards if not 2 for 8 shooting and zero draw controls no matter how you spin it. Beating UNC was an absolute team win and it was the defense, caused turnovers and great goal keeping that won the game. Best player in the sport but BC plays the ultimate, unselfish team game and have big game players and coaches.

Biggest difference in the game was saves.

Bingo. Rachel Hall had the game of her life at the right time. UNC had more shots and shots on goal than BC. Hall had more saves than Moreno (11 to 8). That's the game right there. Both played well, Hall got hot. Flip it, and we aren't having this conversation.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Now you are losing credibility. An "outstanding game" by CN standards if not 2 for 8 shooting and zero draw controls no matter how you spin it. Beating UNC was an absolute team win and it was the defense, caused turnovers and great goal keeping that won the game. Best player in the sport but BC plays the ultimate, unselfish team game and have big game players and coaches.

Biggest difference in the game was saves.

Bingo. Rachel Hall had the game of her life at the right time. UNC had more shots and shots on goal than BC. Hall had more saves than Moreno (11 to 8). That's the game right there. Both played well, Hall got hot. Flip it, and we aren't having this conversation.

Back to how “Defense wins games”

To be exact I just looked NC was 10 for 34 shooting. That will probably cost you some wins. BC played great. Hall as mentioned was 20 percent higher in save percentage in that game versus season average. She played great. Team win.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

To be exact I just looked NC was 10 for 34 shooting. That will probably cost you some wins. BC played great. Hall as mentioned was 20 percent higher in save percentage in that game versus season average. She played great. Team win.

The bulk of the shots were taken by three players, combined for 19 shots with only 9 shots on goal and only 3 goals. That’s less than 50% on goal and 15% shooting percentage. Not trying to diminish the goalie’s effort here, but the above assessment is correct, shooting was an issue.

Well that was last year-

Who wins it this year? Does North repeat as Tew winner? What players emerge to lead teams vs last year? Who will lead the freshmen class(lots of redshirts last year)?

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well that was last year-

Who wins it this year? Does North repeat as Tew winner? What players emerge to lead teams vs last year? Who will lead the freshmen class(lots of redshirts last year)?

It is doubtful that BC Repeats as Champions.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well that was last year-

Who wins it this year? Does North repeat as Tew winner? What players emerge to lead teams vs last year? Who will lead the freshmen class(lots of redshirts last year)?

Comes down to who wins the duel between Hall and Moreno. Great goalie play making a difference in the tourney in a key spot has been the key to the last two champs (Megan Taylor and UMD in 2019 and Rachel Hall as discussed here).

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Well that was last year-

Who wins it this year? Does North repeat as Tew winner? What players emerge to lead teams vs last year? Who will lead the freshmen class(lots of redshirts last year)?

It is doubtful that BC Repeats as Champions.

I think UNC is the favorite, regardless of the rankings.

Would be shocked if both UNC and BC don't make the Final Four. Would also be shocked if either Cuse, UNC or BC don't win it all. It comes down to who gets hot down the stretch of the season. UNC as always will have the best talent but do they play unselfishly as a team and can they overcome their average coaching?