Recruiting

[LaxDadMax]

Thought i'd mention that Syracuse may luck out once again with a former alum's kid. Paul Carcaterra's daughter who's a 2027 is one to watch. She looks Humphrey-esque..

way too early to know how she'll develop but she's looking like a real problem

Syracuse and good lacrosse genes go hand in hand it seems.

She's a 28 now. Very talented player, but i've seen at least 10 28s who I would put well above her. In fact, she isn't even the best player on her own team. If she had a different last name, noone would be talking about her.

However, there are a couple 28s with some syracause ties. Rick Beardsley's daughter and Jaylen Rosga's younger sister are both elite 2028s. (Rosga's mom played ball at cuse)

[ultravisitor]

If the overriding decisions in women's lacrosse are mostly based on academic prestige, then Duke and the Ivies would be regulars winning lacrosse games over Memorial Day weekend.
I would not be surprised if Duke is second to last in ACC this year, even though it has it's pick of top players every year.
Northwestern is the best combo of winning and academic prestige, but I give all the credit to KAH. If she leaves, so do the championship runs.
I commend any women going to an Ivy league program, just never had the FOMO about the Ivies. I always liked to play my music a little too loud and use more colorful language when the Ivies came to play us on fall Saturdays back in college.

No they wouldn't.

You're underestimating the difficulty in gaining admittance to these schools and being able to maintain the expected academic standards of these schools and other high academic schools, like those in the Patriot league. Great lacrosse players with a 2.8 GPA aren't getting into Duke, an Ivy or a Patriot league school as well as some others, regardless of how good they are. But in all honesty, do girls with a 2.8 GPA really have the desire to go to those type of schools anyway? Probably not, and there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has their own path and a lot goes into which school a player chooses.

I think you're also underestimating the importance of the coaches role, both in how they identify talent and how they develop that talent. Duke's classes are never short on top ranked players, neither are Princeton, Penn or Dartmouth's. It's how much better that player gets once they get to these schools that has more of an impact on who wins games on Memorial Day weekend, as you stated.

On that note, how much does the admissions standards of schools like Northwestern and Johns Hopkins affect recruiting? They're not exactly easy schools to get into.

[harflax]

If the overriding decisions in women's lacrosse are mostly based on academic prestige, then Duke and the Ivies would be regulars winning lacrosse games over Memorial Day weekend.
I would not be surprised if Duke is second to last in ACC this year, even though it has it's pick of top players every year.
Northwestern is the best combo of winning and academic prestige, but I give all the credit to KAH. If she leaves, so do the championship runs.
I commend any women going to an Ivy league program, just never had the FOMO about the Ivies. I always liked to play my music a little too loud and use more colorful language when the Ivies came to play us on fall Saturdays back in college.

No they wouldn't.

You're underestimating the difficulty in gaining admittance to these schools and being able to maintain the expected academic standards of these schools and other high academic schools, like those in the Patriot league. Great lacrosse players with a 2.8 GPA aren't getting into Duke, an Ivy or a Patriot league school as well as some others, regardless of how good they are. But in all honesty, do girls with a 2.8 GPA really have the desire to go to those type of schools anyway? Probably not, and there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has their own path and a lot goes into which school a player chooses.

I think you're also underestimating the importance of the coaches role, both in how they identify talent and how they develop that talent. Duke's classes are never short on top ranked players, neither are Princeton, Penn or Dartmouth's. It's how much better that player gets once they get to these schools that has more of an impact on who wins games on Memorial Day weekend, as you stated.

There is one Patriot League school that is an outlier with their admission standards. Loyola has an 84% acceptance rate, one much higher than Maryland College Park and higher than neighboring public universities Towson and UMBC. More importantly , the admission rate at Loyola is significantly higher than other Patriot League Schools. Jen Adams is a tremendous coach, but she has an inherent advantage by being able to get players admitted that would not be admitted at other schools in her conference.

[LaxDadMax]

If the overriding decisions in women's lacrosse are mostly based on academic prestige, then Duke and the Ivies would be regulars winning lacrosse games over Memorial Day weekend.
I would not be surprised if Duke is second to last in ACC this year, even though it has it's pick of top players every year.
Northwestern is the best combo of winning and academic prestige, but I give all the credit to KAH. If she leaves, so do the championship runs.
I commend any women going to an Ivy league program, just never had the FOMO about the Ivies. I always liked to play my music a little too loud and use more colorful language when the Ivies came to play us on fall Saturdays back in college.

No they wouldn't.

You're underestimating the difficulty in gaining admittance to these schools and being able to maintain the expected academic standards of these schools and other high academic schools, like those in the Patriot league. Great lacrosse players with a 2.8 GPA aren't getting into Duke, an Ivy or a Patriot league school as well as some others, regardless of how good they are. But in all honesty, do girls with a 2.8 GPA really have the desire to go to those type of schools anyway? Probably not, and there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has their own path and a lot goes into which school a player chooses.

I think you're also underestimating the importance of the coaches role, both in how they identify talent and how they develop that talent. Duke's classes are never short on top ranked players, neither are Princeton, Penn or Dartmouth's. It's how much better that player gets once they get to these schools that has more of an impact on who wins games on Memorial Day weekend, as you stated.

On that note, how much does the admissions standards of schools like Northwestern and Johns Hopkins affect recruiting? They're not exactly easy schools to get into.

Hopkins standards are much higher than NW. Hopkins generally looks for 3.7/1300+ SATs for its recruits. NW is much lower probably closer to 3.4/1200 plus coaches will get an exception or two for each recruiting class.

[laxfan9999]

NW told my daughter anything above a 3.2 and you are fine.

[hmmm]

If the overriding decisions in women's lacrosse are mostly based on academic prestige, then Duke and the Ivies would be regulars winning lacrosse games over Memorial Day weekend.
I would not be surprised if Duke is second to last in ACC this year, even though it has it's pick of top players every year.
Northwestern is the best combo of winning and academic prestige, but I give all the credit to KAH. If she leaves, so do the championship runs.
I commend any women going to an Ivy league program, just never had the FOMO about the Ivies. I always liked to play my music a little too loud and use more colorful language when the Ivies came to play us on fall Saturdays back in college.

No they wouldn't.

You're underestimating the difficulty in gaining admittance to these schools and being able to maintain the expected academic standards of these schools and other high academic schools, like those in the Patriot league. Great lacrosse players with a 2.8 GPA aren't getting into Duke, an Ivy or a Patriot league school as well as some others, regardless of how good they are. But in all honesty, do girls with a 2.8 GPA really have the desire to go to those type of schools anyway? Probably not, and there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has their own path and a lot goes into which school a player chooses.

I think you're also underestimating the importance of the coaches role, both in how they identify talent and how they develop that talent. Duke's classes are never short on top ranked players, neither are Princeton, Penn or Dartmouth's. It's how much better that player gets once they get to these schools that has more of an impact on who wins games on Memorial Day weekend, as you stated.

On that note, how much does the admissions standards of schools like Northwestern and Johns Hopkins affect recruiting? They're not exactly easy schools to get into.

Hopkins standards are much higher than NW. Hopkins generally looks for 3.7/1300+ SATs for its recruits. NW is much lower probably closer to 3.4/1200 plus coaches will get an exception or two for each recruiting class.

This is not accurate in terms of Hopkins

[MDlaxfan76]

If the overriding decisions in women's lacrosse are mostly based on academic prestige, then Duke and the Ivies would be regulars winning lacrosse games over Memorial Day weekend.
I would not be surprised if Duke is second to last in ACC this year, even though it has it's pick of top players every year.
Northwestern is the best combo of winning and academic prestige, but I give all the credit to KAH. If she leaves, so do the championship runs.
I commend any women going to an Ivy league program, just never had the FOMO about the Ivies. I always liked to play my music a little too loud and use more colorful language when the Ivies came to play us on fall Saturdays back in college.

No they wouldn't.

You're underestimating the difficulty in gaining admittance to these schools and being able to maintain the expected academic standards of these schools and other high academic schools, like those in the Patriot league. Great lacrosse players with a 2.8 GPA aren't getting into Duke, an Ivy or a Patriot league school as well as some others, regardless of how good they are. But in all honesty, do girls with a 2.8 GPA really have the desire to go to those type of schools anyway? Probably not, and there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has their own path and a lot goes into which school a player chooses.

I think you're also underestimating the importance of the coaches role, both in how they identify talent and how they develop that talent. Duke's classes are never short on top ranked players, neither are Princeton, Penn or Dartmouth's. It's how much better that player gets once they get to these schools that has more of an impact on who wins games on Memorial Day weekend, as you stated.

On that note, how much does the admissions standards of schools like Northwestern and Johns Hopkins affect recruiting? They're not exactly easy schools to get into.

Hopkins standards are much higher than NW. Hopkins generally looks for 3.7/1300+ SATs for its recruits. NW is much lower probably closer to 3.4/1200 plus coaches will get an exception or two for each recruiting class.

This is not accurate in terms of Hopkins

Certainly wouldn't be for the men's side, but I think the DI women's side is somewhere between where the Hopkins DIII teams need to hit and where the DI men do. Don't know exactly what the target average is for the women, but would assume they have plenty of range for their top desired recruits.

[hmmm]

If the overriding decisions in women's lacrosse are mostly based on academic prestige, then Duke and the Ivies would be regulars winning lacrosse games over Memorial Day weekend.
I would not be surprised if Duke is second to last in ACC this year, even though it has it's pick of top players every year.
Northwestern is the best combo of winning and academic prestige, but I give all the credit to KAH. If she leaves, so do the championship runs.
I commend any women going to an Ivy league program, just never had the FOMO about the Ivies. I always liked to play my music a little too loud and use more colorful language when the Ivies came to play us on fall Saturdays back in college.

No they wouldn't.

You're underestimating the difficulty in gaining admittance to these schools and being able to maintain the expected academic standards of these schools and other high academic schools, like those in the Patriot league. Great lacrosse players with a 2.8 GPA aren't getting into Duke, an Ivy or a Patriot league school as well as some others, regardless of how good they are. But in all honesty, do girls with a 2.8 GPA really have the desire to go to those type of schools anyway? Probably not, and there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has their own path and a lot goes into which school a player chooses.

I think you're also underestimating the importance of the coaches role, both in how they identify talent and how they develop that talent. Duke's classes are never short on top ranked players, neither are Princeton, Penn or Dartmouth's. It's how much better that player gets once they get to these schools that has more of an impact on who wins games on Memorial Day weekend, as you stated.

On that note, how much does the admissions standards of schools like Northwestern and Johns Hopkins affect recruiting? They're not exactly easy schools to get into.

Hopkins standards are much higher than NW. Hopkins generally looks for 3.7/1300+ SATs for its recruits. NW is much lower probably closer to 3.4/1200 plus coaches will get an exception or two for each recruiting class.

This is not accurate in terms of Hopkins

Certainly wouldn't be for the men's side, but I think the DI women's side is somewhere between where the Hopkins DIII teams need to hit and where the DI men do. Don't know exactly what the target average is for the women, but would assume they have plenty of range for their top desired recruits.

Hopkins is test optional through at least 2026 so in most cases SAT scores don't come into play for wlax. Prior to Covid, those numbers listed were high. They wanted the class average to be around 1300. Plenty of players were admitted well below that.

[LaxDadMax]

If the overriding decisions in women's lacrosse are mostly based on academic prestige, then Duke and the Ivies would be regulars winning lacrosse games over Memorial Day weekend.
I would not be surprised if Duke is second to last in ACC this year, even though it has it's pick of top players every year.
Northwestern is the best combo of winning and academic prestige, but I give all the credit to KAH. If she leaves, so do the championship runs.
I commend any women going to an Ivy league program, just never had the FOMO about the Ivies. I always liked to play my music a little too loud and use more colorful language when the Ivies came to play us on fall Saturdays back in college.

No they wouldn't.

You're underestimating the difficulty in gaining admittance to these schools and being able to maintain the expected academic standards of these schools and other high academic schools, like those in the Patriot league. Great lacrosse players with a 2.8 GPA aren't getting into Duke, an Ivy or a Patriot league school as well as some others, regardless of how good they are. But in all honesty, do girls with a 2.8 GPA really have the desire to go to those type of schools anyway? Probably not, and there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has their own path and a lot goes into which school a player chooses.

I think you're also underestimating the importance of the coaches role, both in how they identify talent and how they develop that talent. Duke's classes are never short on top ranked players, neither are Princeton, Penn or Dartmouth's. It's how much better that player gets once they get to these schools that has more of an impact on who wins games on Memorial Day weekend, as you stated.

On that note, how much does the admissions standards of schools like Northwestern and Johns Hopkins affect recruiting? They're not exactly easy schools to get into.

Hopkins standards are much higher than NW. Hopkins generally looks for 3.7/1300+ SATs for its recruits. NW is much lower probably closer to 3.4/1200 plus coaches will get an exception or two for each recruiting class.

This is not accurate in terms of Hopkins

For women, it is what we were told by coaching staff 3 month ago. Clearly they may be able to average things out for elite players, but we were told we needed 1300 (or PSAT equivalent) to be recruitable. We found most schools that are test optional still needed recruited athletes to have scores to get through admissions.

[HailMaryPass]

Something else to consider... For lots of girls in college, especially in their jr or sr years, lots of them are just done with lax after for the most part playing at a high level since 3rd grade.

For both my 20 and 23, there are upperclassmen on their teams (both top 40 schools) who are clearly checked-out (including a couple who actually play). They don't quit the team because most of their friends are on it, but they are clearly focused on other priorities and truly don't care how much they play.

And all of the girls who are burned out are from LI or Maryland. Small sample size, but I think there is somethingto it.

Burnout is real, especially from lax hotbeds.

Always found this interesting. from D3 school experience, upperclassmen that were checked out/burned out or didn't have a chance of playing a role either on field or sideline were cut from the team. Even seniors that were part of the social circle, did the workouts, kept good grades etc.

Seems like this is not the case with top 40 D1 teams or is it? Makes me wonder how much effort coaches put in to balance the roster size/spots for kids that may actually contribute on the field or in leadership roles versus keeping the peace for the social atmosphere of the team. Esp on teams with a travel roster and how those choices effect the vibe.

"Personality hires" are extremely important for retention rates, players having fun and less drama. Maybe that's why there were so many issues with the D3 school example...

Based on our experience alone (don't want to speak for any other programs), I think it is a combo of a few things

1) Total numbers to have a practice. At the D1 level, many schools run 2 fields when they are working on settled play-- first unit and rotation players and a full scout team.

this means you usually have 17 field players on first team O (7 starters 3-4 backups plus 7 on scout team) and 17 field players on first team D. This means you need at least 34-36 healthy field players at any time. Ultimately, this means needing bodies.

2) Relationships with top club programs. Another big reason why lots of girls who will never play don't get cut is that coaches don't want to sour relationships with the top club programs who they regularly pull girls from. Hearing about girls who get cut don't help recruit future girls

3) Relationships within the team. Lots of upperclassmen bench players are key parts of the team social circle. (even more than many of the starters). Don't want to create additional drama.

Thank you!

[MDlaxfan76]

If the overriding decisions in women's lacrosse are mostly based on academic prestige, then Duke and the Ivies would be regulars winning lacrosse games over Memorial Day weekend.
I would not be surprised if Duke is second to last in ACC this year, even though it has it's pick of top players every year.
Northwestern is the best combo of winning and academic prestige, but I give all the credit to KAH. If she leaves, so do the championship runs.
I commend any women going to an Ivy league program, just never had the FOMO about the Ivies. I always liked to play my music a little too loud and use more colorful language when the Ivies came to play us on fall Saturdays back in college.

No they wouldn't.

You're underestimating the difficulty in gaining admittance to these schools and being able to maintain the expected academic standards of these schools and other high academic schools, like those in the Patriot league. Great lacrosse players with a 2.8 GPA aren't getting into Duke, an Ivy or a Patriot league school as well as some others, regardless of how good they are. But in all honesty, do girls with a 2.8 GPA really have the desire to go to those type of schools anyway? Probably not, and there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has their own path and a lot goes into which school a player chooses.

I think you're also underestimating the importance of the coaches role, both in how they identify talent and how they develop that talent. Duke's classes are never short on top ranked players, neither are Princeton, Penn or Dartmouth's. It's how much better that player gets once they get to these schools that has more of an impact on who wins games on Memorial Day weekend, as you stated.

On that note, how much does the admissions standards of schools like Northwestern and Johns Hopkins affect recruiting? They're not exactly easy schools to get into.

Hopkins standards are much higher than NW. Hopkins generally looks for 3.7/1300+ SATs for its recruits. NW is much lower probably closer to 3.4/1200 plus coaches will get an exception or two for each recruiting class.

This is not accurate in terms of Hopkins

For women, it is what we were told by coaching staff 3 month ago. Clearly they may be able to average things out for elite players, but we were told we needed 1300 (or PSAT equivalent) to be recruitable. We found most schools that are test optional still needed recruited athletes to have scores to get through admissions.

"To be recruitable" may have been a polite way to say what was needed for a particular recruit, not so much for the most desired recruit. Schools generally set some targets for their teams to achieve on average and that might be their standard line for the average recruit, but they clearly make exceptions. Hop has very high targets for their DIII teams, including football, but the DI teams get much more latitude, men more than women if I understand correctly.

But whatever the latitude, the school does want DI recruits to be able to survive the academic challenge and most do...

The men are doing quite well in academic honors within the Big 10: https://hopkinssports.com/news/2023/6/2 ... onors.aspx That's requiring a 3.0. No hard sciences on this list though.

Women doing very well too, note majors: https://hopkinssports.com/news/2023/6/3 ... g-ten.aspx

Women crushing it at high end, with 14 with a 3.5 : https://hopkinssports.com/news/2022/7/2 ... onors.aspx

[MDlaxfan76]

If the overriding decisions in women's lacrosse are mostly based on academic prestige, then Duke and the Ivies would be regulars winning lacrosse games over Memorial Day weekend.
I would not be surprised if Duke is second to last in ACC this year, even though it has it's pick of top players every year.
Northwestern is the best combo of winning and academic prestige, but I give all the credit to KAH. If she leaves, so do the championship runs.
I commend any women going to an Ivy league program, just never had the FOMO about the Ivies. I always liked to play my music a little too loud and use more colorful language when the Ivies came to play us on fall Saturdays back in college.

No they wouldn't.

You're underestimating the difficulty in gaining admittance to these schools and being able to maintain the expected academic standards of these schools and other high academic schools, like those in the Patriot league. Great lacrosse players with a 2.8 GPA aren't getting into Duke, an Ivy or a Patriot league school as well as some others, regardless of how good they are. But in all honesty, do girls with a 2.8 GPA really have the desire to go to those type of schools anyway? Probably not, and there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has their own path and a lot goes into which school a player chooses.

I think you're also underestimating the importance of the coaches role, both in how they identify talent and how they develop that talent. Duke's classes are never short on top ranked players, neither are Princeton, Penn or Dartmouth's. It's how much better that player gets once they get to these schools that has more of an impact on who wins games on Memorial Day weekend, as you stated.

On that note, how much does the admissions standards of schools like Northwestern and Johns Hopkins affect recruiting? They're not exactly easy schools to get into.

Hopkins standards are much higher than NW. Hopkins generally looks for 3.7/1300+ SATs for its recruits. NW is much lower probably closer to 3.4/1200 plus coaches will get an exception or two for each recruiting class.

This is not accurate in terms of Hopkins

For women, it is what we were told by coaching staff 3 month ago. Clearly they may be able to average things out for elite players, but we were told we needed 1300 (or PSAT equivalent) to be recruitable. We found most schools that are test optional still needed recruited athletes to have scores to get through admissions.

"To be recruitable" may have been a polite way to say what was needed for a particular recruit, not so much for the most desired recruit. Schools generally set some targets for their teams to achieve on average and that might be their standard line for the average recruit, but they clearly make exceptions. Hop has very high targets for their DIII teams, including football, but the DI teams get much more latitude, men more than women if I understand correctly.

But whatever the latitude, the school does want DI recruits to be able to survive the academic challenge and most do...

The men are doing quite well in academic honors within the Big 10: https://hopkinssports.com/news/2023/6/2 ... onors.aspx That's requiring a 3.0. No hard sciences on this list though.

Women doing very well too, note majors: https://hopkinssports.com/news/2023/6/3 ... g-ten.aspx

Women crushing it at high end, with 14 with a 3.5 : https://hopkinssports.com/news/2022/7/2 ... onors.aspx

[MDlaxfan76]

trying to respond above but quoting is messed up.

[WLaxdad]

If the overriding decisions in women's lacrosse are mostly based on academic prestige, then Duke and the Ivies would be regulars winning lacrosse games over Memorial Day weekend.
I would not be surprised if Duke is second to last in ACC this year, even though it has it's pick of top players every year.
Northwestern is the best combo of winning and academic prestige, but I give all the credit to KAH. If she leaves, so do the championship runs.
I commend any women going to an Ivy league program, just never had the FOMO about the Ivies. I always liked to play my music a little too loud and use more colorful language when the Ivies came to play us on fall Saturdays back in college.

No they wouldn't.

You're underestimating the difficulty in gaining admittance to these schools and being able to maintain the expected academic standards of these schools and other high academic schools, like those in the Patriot league. Great lacrosse players with a 2.8 GPA aren't getting into Duke, an Ivy or a Patriot league school as well as some others, regardless of how good they are. But in all honesty, do girls with a 2.8 GPA really have the desire to go to those type of schools anyway? Probably not, and there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has their own path and a lot goes into which school a player chooses.

I think you're also underestimating the importance of the coaches role, both in how they identify talent and how they develop that talent. Duke's classes are never short on top ranked players, neither are Princeton, Penn or Dartmouth's. It's how much better that player gets once they get to these schools that has more of an impact on who wins games on Memorial Day weekend, as you stated.

On that note, how much does the admissions standards of schools like Northwestern and Johns Hopkins affect recruiting? They're not exactly easy schools to get into.

Hopkins standards are much higher than NW. Hopkins generally looks for 3.7/1300+ SATs for its recruits. NW is much lower probably closer to 3.4/1200 plus coaches will get an exception or two for each recruiting class.

This is not accurate in terms of Hopkins

For women, it is what we were told by coaching staff 3 month ago. Clearly they may be able to average things out for elite players, but we were told we needed 1300 (or PSAT equivalent) to be recruitable. We found most schools that are test optional still needed recruited athletes to have scores to get through admissions.

"To be recruitable" may have been a polite way to say what was needed for a particular recruit, not so much for the most desired recruit. Schools generally set some targets for their teams to achieve on average and that might be their standard line for the average recruit, but they clearly make exceptions. Hop has very high targets for their DIII teams, including football, but the DI teams get much more latitude, men more than women if I understand correctly.

But whatever the latitude, the school does want DI recruits to be able to survive the academic challenge and most do...

The men are doing quite well in academic honors within the Big 10: https://hopkinssports.com/news/2023/6/2 ... onors.aspx That's requiring a 3.0. No hard sciences on this list though.

Women doing very well too, note majors: https://hopkinssports.com/news/2023/6/3 ... g-ten.aspx

Women crushing it at high end, with 14 with a 3.5 : https://hopkinssports.com/news/2022/7/2 ... onors.aspx

Looking at the women's list I see almost all public health and political science, not hard to keep a high GPA with those majors (shout out to the 2 women going for Biology).

I guess if your going to make a career with a public health degree Hopkins is the place to do it but still high GPA's are not surprising.

[user1020]

If the overriding decisions in women's lacrosse are mostly based on academic prestige, then Duke and the Ivies would be regulars winning lacrosse games over Memorial Day weekend.
I would not be surprised if Duke is second to last in ACC this year, even though it has it's pick of top players every year.
Northwestern is the best combo of winning and academic prestige, but I give all the credit to KAH. If she leaves, so do the championship runs.
I commend any women going to an Ivy league program, just never had the FOMO about the Ivies. I always liked to play my music a little too loud and use more colorful language when the Ivies came to play us on fall Saturdays back in college.

No they wouldn't.

You're underestimating the difficulty in gaining admittance to these schools and being able to maintain the expected academic standards of these schools and other high academic schools, like those in the Patriot league. Great lacrosse players with a 2.8 GPA aren't getting into Duke, an Ivy or a Patriot league school as well as some others, regardless of how good they are. But in all honesty, do girls with a 2.8 GPA really have the desire to go to those type of schools anyway? Probably not, and there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has their own path and a lot goes into which school a player chooses.

I think you're also underestimating the importance of the coaches role, both in how they identify talent and how they develop that talent. Duke's classes are never short on top ranked players, neither are Princeton, Penn or Dartmouth's. It's how much better that player gets once they get to these schools that has more of an impact on who wins games on Memorial Day weekend, as you stated.

On that note, how much does the admissions standards of schools like Northwestern and Johns Hopkins affect recruiting? They're not exactly easy schools to get into.

Hopkins standards are much higher than NW. Hopkins generally looks for 3.7/1300+ SATs for its recruits. NW is much lower probably closer to 3.4/1200 plus coaches will get an exception or two for each recruiting class.

This is not accurate in terms of Hopkins

For women, it is what we were told by coaching staff 3 month ago. Clearly they may be able to average things out for elite players, but we were told we needed 1300 (or PSAT equivalent) to be recruitable. We found most schools that are test optional still needed recruited athletes to have scores to get through admissions.

"To be recruitable" may have been a polite way to say what was needed for a particular recruit, not so much for the most desired recruit. Schools generally set some targets for their teams to achieve on average and that might be their standard line for the average recruit, but they clearly make exceptions. Hop has very high targets for their DIII teams, including football, but the DI teams get much more latitude, men more than women if I understand correctly.

But whatever the latitude, the school does want DI recruits to be able to survive the academic challenge and most do...

The men are doing quite well in academic honors within the Big 10: https://hopkinssports.com/news/2023/6/2 ... onors.aspx That's requiring a 3.0. No hard sciences on this list though.

Women doing very well too, note majors: https://hopkinssports.com/news/2023/6/3 ... g-ten.aspx

Women crushing it at high end, with 14 with a 3.5 : https://hopkinssports.com/news/2022/7/2 ... onors.aspx

Looking at the women's list I see almost all public health and political science, not hard to keep a high GPA with those majors (shout out to the 2 women going for Biology).

I guess if your going to make a career with a public health degree Hopkins is the place to do it but still high GPA's are not surprising.

This degrades those majors at Hopkins but public health majors take a lot of difficult science classes. Also not sure any major at Hopkins is actually easy.

[MDlaxfan76]

Clearly there are some easier courses than others at the most demanding institutions, regardless of major, but it's definitely the case that the hard science majors are the most demanding, with fewest 'easier' courses. Public health requires numerous such of these harder courses. Biology nearly all.

If you look at the Hopkins Football roster's majors you'll see a heck of lot of hard science majors.

Hopkins women's lax, a few. Men's very rarely but not nonexistent. For instance of the 34 men's players who had a 3.0, one was studying Mechanical Engineering, another Psychology, the rest are Economics or Political Science with a couple of International Studies and one Global Security Studies. None of those are 'gut' majors, but most aren't Mechanical Engineering, Biology, or Molecular & Cellular Biology.

The women's team overall had a 3.6 GPA...and at Hop that's pretty darn good.

My point had simply been that the DI admission process has a much broader range than the DIII, but overall the DI teams perform pretty darn well. But perhaps with less demanding majors than the DIII teams typically have on their roster.

[hmmm]

Clearly there are some easier courses than others at the most demanding institutions, regardless of major, but it's definitely the case that the hard science majors are the most demanding, with fewest 'easier' courses. Public health requires numerous such of these harder courses. Biology nearly all.

If you look at the Hopkins Football roster's majors you'll see a heck of lot of hard science majors.

Hopkins women's lax, a few. Men's very rarely but not nonexistent. For instance of the 34 men's players who had a 3.0, one was studying Mechanical Engineering, another Psychology, the rest are Economics or Political Science with a couple of International Studies and one Global Security Studies. None of those are 'gut' majors, but most aren't Mechanical Engineering, Biology, or Molecular & Cellular Biology.

The women's team overall had a 3.6 GPA...and at Hop that's pretty darn good.

My point had simply been that the DI admission process has a much broader range than the DIII, but overall the DI teams perform pretty darn well. But perhaps with less demanding majors than the DIII teams typically have on their roster.

I would concur on there not being any "easy" majors at Hopkins. I talked to Petro a few years back about this. Particularly about a couple guys that were key pieces in a MD men's national championship team. He said he tried like hell to get them. It wasn't a matter of getting them into school, he said that wasn't a problem. But the issue with a lot of those kids is that there are no "easy" majors to put them in and they have to be willing to do the work once they get on campus. In those 2 players cases, it wasn't something they were committed to doing.

[jff97]

ILWomen put out their freshman impact rankings, a list of the top 25 freshman in the country so far. Here's where they were in the publications recruting rankings that were released before the season. They ranked the top 50 players, then listed the next best 50 players in alphabetical order. Use this to further whatever agenda you wish.
25. Joely Caramelli, M, Syracuse 4-star watch list
24. Kyra Obert, M/A, Denver 4-star watch list
23. Payton Tini, M, Rutgers 4-star watch list
22. Katie Clare, M, Yale #42, 4-star
21. Ashley Dyer, D, Florida #22, 5-star
20. Laura O'Connor, G, Yale unranked
19. Alex Gladding, D, Vanderbilt unranked
18. Codi Johnson, D, Brown 4-star watch list
17. Catherine Berkey, A, Penn unranked
16. Olivia Ripple, M, Denver 4-star watch list
15. Anna Regan, M/Draw, USC 4-star watch list
14. Maisy Clevenger, M, Maryland #6, 5-star
13. Mikayla Williams, M, Navy unranked
12. Kate Galica, M, Virginia 4-star watch list
11. Fiona O'Keefe, A, Dartmouth unranked
10. Regan Byrne, A, Clemson #13, 5-star
9. Lydia Colasante, D, Boston College #3, 5-star
8. Madison Alaimo, A, Virginia #39, 4-star
7. Eva Ingrilli, A, North Carolina #17, 5-star
6. Ava Bleckley, D, James Madison #20, 5-star
5. GraceAnn Leonard, M, North Carolina #23, 5-star
4. Natalie Shurtleff, M, Clemson #2, 5-star
3. Kaci Benoit D, Syracuse #12, 5-star
2. Jenna DiNardo, A, Virginia 4-star watch list
1. Aliya Polisky, A, Stanford #14, 5-star

[Essexfenwick]

If the overriding decisions in women's lacrosse are mostly based on academic prestige, then Duke and the Ivies would be regulars winning lacrosse games over Memorial Day weekend.
I would not be surprised if Duke is second to last in ACC this year, even though it has it's pick of top players every year.
Northwestern is the best combo of winning and academic prestige, but I give all the credit to KAH. If she leaves, so do the championship runs.
I commend any women going to an Ivy league program, just never had the FOMO about the Ivies. I always liked to play my music a little too loud and use more colorful language when the Ivies came to play us on fall Saturdays back in college.

No they wouldn't.

You're underestimating the difficulty in gaining admittance to these schools and being able to maintain the expected academic standards of these schools and other high academic schools, like those in the Patriot league. Great lacrosse players with a 2.8 GPA aren't getting into Duke, an Ivy or a Patriot league school as well as some others, regardless of how good they are. But in all honesty, do girls with a 2.8 GPA really have the desire to go to those type of schools anyway? Probably not, and there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has their own path and a lot goes into which school a player chooses.

I think you're also underestimating the importance of the coaches role, both in how they identify talent and how they develop that talent. Duke's classes are never short on top ranked players, neither are Princeton, Penn or Dartmouth's. It's how much better that player gets once they get to these schools that has more of an impact on who wins games on Memorial Day weekend, as you stated.

There is one Patriot League school that is an outlier with their admission standards. Loyola has an 84% acceptance rate, one much higher than Maryland College Park and higher than neighboring public universities Towson and UMBC. More importantly , the admission rate at Loyola is significantly higher than other Patriot League Schools. Jen Adams is a tremendous coach, but she has an inherent advantage by being able to get players admitted that would not be admitted at other schools in her conference.

Give me a break. Brooke Shields was admitted and graduated quickly from Princeton.

Uva admits from community colleges with no SAT requirement.

College is like high school now. You have to go to graduate school for any bonafides unless you are a STEM graduate.

[LaxDadMax]

ILWomen put out their freshman impact rankings, a list of the top 25 freshman in the country so far. Here's where they were in the publications recruting rankings that were released before the season. They ranked the top 50 players, then listed the next best 50 players in alphabetical order. Use this to further whatever agenda you wish.
25. Joely Caramelli, M, Syracuse 4-star watch list
24. Kyra Obert, M/A, Denver 4-star watch list
23. Payton Tini, M, Rutgers 4-star watch list
22. Katie Clare, M, Yale #42, 4-star
21. Ashley Dyer, D, Florida #22, 5-star
20. Laura O'Connor, G, Yale unranked
19. Alex Gladding, D, Vanderbilt unranked
18. Codi Johnson, D, Brown 4-star watch list
17. Catherine Berkey, A, Penn unranked
16. Olivia Ripple, M, Denver 4-star watch list
15. Anna Regan, M/Draw, USC 4-star watch list
14. Maisy Clevenger, M, Maryland #6, 5-star
13. Mikayla Williams, M, Navy unranked
12. Kate Galica, M, Virginia 4-star watch list
11. Fiona O'Keefe, A, Dartmouth unranked
10. Regan Byrne, A, Clemson #13, 5-star
9. Lydia Colasante, D, Boston College #3, 5-star
8. Madison Alaimo, A, Virginia #39, 4-star
7. Eva Ingrilli, A, North Carolina #17, 5-star
6. Ava Bleckley, D, James Madison #20, 5-star
5. GraceAnn Leonard, M, North Carolina #23, 5-star
4. Natalie Shurtleff, M, Clemson #2, 5-star
3. Kaci Benoit D, Syracuse #12, 5-star
2. Jenna DiNardo, A, Virginia 4-star watch list
1. Aliya Polisky, A, Stanford #14, 5-star

No offense to anyone on this list, but whoever made these rankings doesn't watch much lax.