Home
Use this thread to discuss the 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/07/20 05:20 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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..
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/07/20 08:10 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/17/20 03:47 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/17/20 03:47 AM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/17/20 04:43 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/18/20 07:39 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/19/20 10:58 AM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/19/20 07:07 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/21/20 10:15 AM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/21/20 01:01 PM
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....
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/21/20 02:09 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/21/20 02:38 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/21/20 03:35 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/22/20 11:30 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/22/20 04:42 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/24/20 01:50 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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....
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 08/25/20 03:17 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 09/28/20 06:31 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 09/29/20 12:04 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 09/29/20 01:39 PM
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....
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 09/30/20 11:30 AM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 09/30/20 10:14 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/01/20 06:20 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/06/20 01:44 PM
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?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/07/20 01:34 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/09/20 03:02 PM
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 ?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/09/20 04:44 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/09/20 05:21 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/09/20 06:28 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/10/20 02:17 AM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/10/20 01:48 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/16/20 07:06 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/17/20 04:06 PM
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/18/20 05:38 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/18/20 04:34 PM
I heard the invites for Women’s USA Team went out. Does anyone have the list or know the players? Any surprises?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/18/20 04:56 PM
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!
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/19/20 12:14 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/19/20 06:45 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/19/20 07:58 PM
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?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/19/20 09:04 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 01:22 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 01:48 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 01:52 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 02:01 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 02:05 PM
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!
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 02:58 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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”.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 02:58 PM
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 03:15 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 03:15 PM
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 03:28 PM
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(
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 04:11 PM
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 04:22 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 04:37 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 05:01 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 05:03 PM
Well looks like proud mommy. Embarrassing to be honest.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 05:15 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 05:20 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 05:24 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 05:39 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 06:01 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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]
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 06:06 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 06:17 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 06:32 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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...
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 06:32 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 06:38 PM
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/
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 06:50 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 07:24 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 07:55 PM
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!
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 08:30 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 08:34 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 08:56 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 09:00 PM
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?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 09:02 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 09:31 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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!
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 09:38 PM
". 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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 09:41 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 09:55 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/20/20 11:02 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 12:11 AM
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 .
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 01:32 AM
"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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 02:19 AM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 02:31 AM
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...
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 11:07 AM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 01:03 PM
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?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 01:17 PM
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 01:28 PM
Who are the 20 people? Is there a list?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 02:18 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 02:39 PM
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?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 02:54 PM
Also hearing many players chose not to apply for whatever reasons so the player pool was smaller than anticipated which makes sense
Posted By: cltlax Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 03:01 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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?

Made sure to get in the roster bio on the SB website: "AS A FRESHMAN IN 2020-21: Youngest member invited to 50-player official tryout for U.S. team that will represent country in 2021 World Lacrosse Women’s World Championship."
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 03:02 PM
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 .
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 03:26 PM
“ 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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 03:35 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 04:03 PM
"[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 .
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 04:56 PM
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 05:00 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 05:01 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 05:18 PM
With different states having different rules how can there be college sports
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 05:41 PM
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?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 05:42 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 05:58 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 07:08 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 07:26 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 09:17 PM
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 10:12 PM
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/21/20 11:17 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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!
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/22/20 12:38 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/22/20 01:09 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/22/20 01:10 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/22/20 03:05 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/22/20 10:22 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/22/20 02:19 PM
I am hearing The 2020 class to get another year for Spring sports, but only might be that class.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/22/20 03:03 PM
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/22/20 04:49 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/22/20 05:43 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/22/20 06:39 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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 .
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/22/20 08:41 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/22/20 08:45 PM
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 .
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/22/20 09:40 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/23/20 05:00 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/23/20 05:50 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/23/20 09:11 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/23/20 10:08 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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 .
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/23/20 10:33 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/24/20 12:32 PM
“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 .
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/24/20 04:46 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/24/20 05:39 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/24/20 08:03 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/25/20 12:37 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/25/20 02:30 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/25/20 03:36 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/26/20 12:28 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/26/20 10:25 AM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 10/30/20 10:31 AM
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...
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/03/20 06:33 PM
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."
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/07/20 05:12 PM
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 .
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/07/20 10:26 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/08/20 03:34 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/08/20 03:41 AM
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/08/20 03:42 AM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/08/20 03:46 AM
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/08/20 11:25 AM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/08/20 01:00 PM
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/09/20 01:47 PM
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?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/09/20 02:10 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/09/20 03:35 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/09/20 05:32 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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: ,,,,,,,,,,,
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/09/20 05:44 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/09/20 06:28 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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”?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/09/20 07:15 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/09/20 10:14 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/09/20 11:14 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 12:52 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 01:12 AM
Ivys absolutely will not play
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 12:38 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 01:05 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Ivys absolutely will not play


Agreed doesn’t look likely
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 03:30 PM
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 04:12 PM
That was in July FYI. Didn't just happen.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 06:26 PM
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"
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 07:09 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 07:36 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 08:50 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 09:29 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 10:13 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 10:49 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/10/20 11:26 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/11/20 12:10 AM
"[/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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/11/20 12:32 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/11/20 12:55 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/11/20 01:55 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/11/20 02:09 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/11/20 01:26 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/11/20 01:35 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/11/20 03:15 PM
---- "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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/11/20 05:23 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/11/20 06:32 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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...
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/11/20 09:01 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/11/20 10:42 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/11/20 11:05 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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....
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 01:37 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 01:59 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 02:32 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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!
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 02:53 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 03:53 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 05:24 PM
[/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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 05:59 PM
All this talk about Stanford, lacrosse is right up there with golf as a sport dominated by white & wealthy athletes.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 06:53 PM
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)
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 08:00 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 08:54 PM
information coming soon

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/arti...eet-thursday-discuss-spring-sports/57011
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 10:02 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 11:07 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 11:21 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous

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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/12/20 11:42 PM
[/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...
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/13/20 02:56 PM
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!
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/13/20 05:12 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/13/20 06:12 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/13/20 07:19 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/13/20 09:29 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/13/20 09:49 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/14/20 02:07 AM
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 .
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/14/20 12:40 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/14/20 03:20 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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. 😃
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/15/20 05:48 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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!!
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/15/20 11:17 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/15/20 11:17 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/16/20 02:33 PM
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?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/16/20 09:03 PM
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?
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/16/20 10:33 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/17/20 03:35 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/18/20 04:28 AM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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 .
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/18/20 12:00 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/18/20 01:02 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/18/20 04:59 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/18/20 10:02 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/23/20 03:56 PM
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...
Posted By: cltlax Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/23/20 07:00 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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...
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/23/20 07:41 PM
Originally Posted by cltlax
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/24/20 09:51 PM
Originally Posted by cltlax
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/27/20 11:04 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/28/20 02:54 PM
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..
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/28/20 08:33 PM
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/30/20 03:44 PM
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.
Posted By: cltlax Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 11/30/20 06:23 PM
Originally Posted by Anonymous
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.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: 2020-2021 Women's College Lacrosse Season - 12/01/20 02:09 AM
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.
© Back of THE CAGE