NESCAC

[JumboFan4]

From @DIIIlacrosse on Twitter: If there was ever a year...@TuftsLacrosse and @TerrierMLAX have to find a way to schedule a game in April, an abbreviated Beanpot. Make it happen @CoachDAnnolfo @RyanPolleyBU

I'd love to see it and think it would be a great game but I just don't see the upside for BU.

I’d love to see it, but don’t see the upside for either team. For BU there’s no extra street cred for beating a D-III team and, frankly, the same goes for Tufts. Not much credence for beating a D-I team that’s not in the Top 20.

I know we love these teams and this conference, but beating top 20 D1 just isn't realistic. I think Tufts could compete quite well with teams 30-50 in D1 and handle the teams below that... but top 30 would be a real struggle and top 20 are most likely absolute blow outs.

I think Tufts could absolutely play with the bottom half of the top 20. Are programs like Hofstra, Lehigh, UMass, heck even Rutgers, recruiting better talent than Tufts? The team has the NJ state player of the year and several US Lacrosse or Under Armour AA’s on the team. If every D1 team was able to give full scholarships to every player, then maybe I’d buy that argument, but I don’t think the talent or coaching gap is that wide.

[Laxxal22]

Are programs like Hofstra, Lehigh, UMass, heck even Rutgers, recruiting better talent than Tufts?

Yes, and I think the absolute world of Tufts. There are a lot of very strong MA players on Tufts, but I wouldn't take any of them over Jeff Trainor or the Tobins on UMAss. Many Tufts guys would be impact to strong role players in D1, but two of their preseason AAs were depth pieces on D1 teams in that 30-50 range before transferring. D1 fans can be dismissive of top DIII, and as a reaction I think us DIII fans tend to dismiss how much great high school talent goes to teams like Bryant, Providence, BU, Holy Cross that rarely sniff a national ranking.

[lilax]

What people fail to understand is the majority of DI is not at the 12.6 Scholarship Maximum. You can tell which teams are because they are the consistent Top 10. I'd say over 60% of DI teams are nowhere close to the max.

You can also make the case that NESCAC schools thanks to generous alumni bases have better budgets and more resources than many DI schools. Much of the NESCAC has 2 Full-Time assistants. There are schools in the Top 20 that don’t have that.

That means you have more coaches recruiting, developing players, and focused on Lacrosse activities.

So all things being equal as a financial aid recruit, who are you choosing? Holy Cross/Marist/Providence or Tufts/RIT/Salisbury?

[JumboFan4]

Are programs like Hofstra, Lehigh, UMass, heck even Rutgers, recruiting better talent than Tufts?

Yes, and I think the absolute world of Tufts. There are a lot of very strong MA players on Tufts, but I wouldn't take any of them over Jeff Trainor or the Tobins on UMAss. Many Tufts guys would be impact to strong role players in D1, but two of their preseason AAs were depth pieces on D1 teams in that 30-50 range before transferring. D1 fans can be dismissive of top DIII, and as a reaction I think us DIII fans tend to dismiss how much great high school talent goes to teams like Bryant, Providence, BU, Holy Cross that rarely sniff a national ranking.

I'd be interested to see how Hofstra plays against Townson on Saturday. I'm using the transitive property here, which is always questionable, but Towson lost to Drexel, which lost to Salisbury in a scrimmage by eight goals. Saturday's outcome may help prove out the argument.

[Laxxal22]

So all things being equal as a financial aid recruit, who are you choosing? Holy Cross/Marist/Providence or Tufts/RIT/Salisbury?

There's a lot of guys on Tufts/RIT/Salisbury who started at mid-major D1s, so the answer might surprise you. I don't think it's right, or even healthy, but many kids (and unfortunately probably their dads) are hellbent on going D1 even if they're probably signing up for four losing seasons.

Again, Tufts is an amazing team, but even in an up year are they doing any better than 5th place in the Ivy, 4th in the Patriot, 4th in the Big East, or 3rd in the SoCon? Take 5 from the ACC and Five from the Big Ten (sorry Michigan) and we're well into the 20s without even considering America East, CAC, and the NEC.

The growth of college lacrosse, especially D1, has not remotely kept pace with the growth of youth, high school, and club lacrosse. Teams 30-50 are damn good and imo it's huge compliment saying Tufts and other top DIII can hang with them.

[Laxxal22]

Are programs like Hofstra, Lehigh, UMass, heck even Rutgers, recruiting better talent than Tufts?

Yes, and I think the absolute world of Tufts. There are a lot of very strong MA players on Tufts, but I wouldn't take any of them over Jeff Trainor or the Tobins on UMAss. Many Tufts guys would be impact to strong role players in D1, but two of their preseason AAs were depth pieces on D1 teams in that 30-50 range before transferring. D1 fans can be dismissive of top DIII, and as a reaction I think us DIII fans tend to dismiss how much great high school talent goes to teams like Bryant, Providence, BU, Holy Cross that rarely sniff a national ranking.

I'd be interested to see how Hofstra plays against Townson on Saturday. I'm using the transitive property here, which is always questionable, but Towson lost to Drexel, which lost to Salisbury in a scrimmage by eight goals. Saturday's outcome may help prove out the argument.

I was psyched to see that result too until I watched the highlights. I think Salisbury was down 1 after the first and maybe up 1 at the half which leads me to believe Drexel played the second half more like a scrimmage than the Gulls.

[JumboFan4]

Are programs like Hofstra, Lehigh, UMass, heck even Rutgers, recruiting better talent than Tufts?

Yes, and I think the absolute world of Tufts. There are a lot of very strong MA players on Tufts, but I wouldn't take any of them over Jeff Trainor or the Tobins on UMAss. Many Tufts guys would be impact to strong role players in D1, but two of their preseason AAs were depth pieces on D1 teams in that 30-50 range before transferring. D1 fans can be dismissive of top DIII, and as a reaction I think us DIII fans tend to dismiss how much great high school talent goes to teams like Bryant, Providence, BU, Holy Cross that rarely sniff a national ranking.

I'd be interested to see how Hofstra plays against Townson on Saturday. I'm using the transitive property here, which is always questionable, but Towson lost to Drexel, which lost to Salisbury in a scrimmage by eight goals. Saturday's outcome may help prove out the argument.

I was psyched to see that result too until I watched the highlights. I think Salisbury was down 1 after the first and maybe up 1 at the half which leads me to believe Drexel played the second half more like a scrimmage than the Gulls.

Ah I see. That's good color. Thanks for keeping this in perspective.

[Lax3]

We would be taking nothing away from the best of the best of D3 in saying that they would generally get their butts handed to them in games against the top 30+ teams at the D1 level. There are certainly dozens of D3 players who could play at the D1 level, including some at a moderately high level of D1, but the lack of depth would wear the D3 teams down very, very quickly. And the top D3 players would get covered by the top pole or LSM and almost certainly either get shut down or only score a fraction of what they would do against the best D3 defenders. Faster, quicker, bigger. Again, however, nothing at all to be ashamed of! D1 is just a different world than D3.

[Dehuntshigwa’es]

Spot on with your remarks concerning a top 5 D3 team’s ability to hang at the D1 level. Yes, occasionally a particular player( like the Lynchburg kid at High Point currently) May be impactful but they are rare. More importantly is your reference to a playing a complete season. The wear and tear on a D3 team playing a D1 schedule would grind them to dust. This conversation has been thrown around for decades. Play where you are at, be the best you can be,enjoy every moment, it’s over fast.

[baltlaxdad1966]

Spot on with your remarks concerning a top 5 D3 team’s ability to hang at the D1 level. Yes, occasionally a particular player( like the Lynchburg kid at High Point currently) May be impactful but they are rare. More importantly is your reference to a playing a complete season. The wear and tear on a D3 team playing a D1 schedule would grind them to dust. This conversation has been thrown around for decades. Play where you are at, be the best you can be,enjoy every moment, it’s over fast.

The starting LSM for hopkins was playing d3 basketball the last 3 years. he seems to be holding up fine with the rigors of a d1 sport. no signs of crumbling into dust yet!

[ColonelFastBreak]

yes, occasionally a particular player( like the Lynchburg kid at High Point currently) May be impactful but they are rare.

While I agree that top D3 teams will struggle with the top 35 or so D1 teams (generally speaking, with exceptions on a year to year basis...recently.... 2011 Salisbury, 2015 Tufts, loss aside perhaps 2020 Salisbury), I am not so sure that a D3 all american excelling in division I would be all that rare. This year is providing unique proof. See all these guys:

Chalastawa (2019 2nd Team AA) from Bates is Fairfield's third leading scorer

Rogers (2019 2nd team AA) from Lynchburg is High Point's second leading scorer

Wycoff (2019 3rd Team AA) from Gettysburg started one of three games for Syracuse this year. Has played in two of 3.

McCormack (2018 3rd Team AA) from Middlebury is second leading scorer and leading goal scorer for UVM. Never led Middlebury in scoring until shortened 2020 season, though that isn't totally fair given that he was regularly moved between midfield and attack and dealt with injuries.

Helping your case are guys like:

Jimmy McAfee (2019 1st Team AA) from Amherst at Villanova: 1 GP
Peter Pittroff (2019 HM AA) from Denison at Providence College: O GP
Jon Coffey from Amherst at Duke: 3 GP

Are any of the guys excelling so amazing that you at any point thought to yourself "I just do not understand how they are playing in division III?" For me, the answer is unequivocally "no" and I also do not believe that to be any sort of slight. It is all very much a hypothetical, but I think the level of individual skill from some of the best in D III does allow them to fit in and excel in many DI settings. "Impactful" just strikes me as a low bar.

[Dave]

Trinity v Conn...3/27 and 3/28...home at home series....its a start.

I also hear Conn has WNE on 3/20 and Mitchell on 3/21

[isaacwright22]

Mitchell on 3/21

lmao thats an ego boost game right there

[Dehuntshigwa’es]

Spot on with your remarks concerning a top 5 D3 team’s ability to hang at the D1 level. Yes, occasionally a particular player( like the Lynchburg kid at High Point currently) May be impactful but they are rare. More importantly is your reference to a playing a complete season. The wear and tear on a D3 team playing a D1 schedule would grind them to dust. This conversation has been thrown around for decades. Play where you are at, be the best you can be,enjoy every moment, it’s over fast.

The starting LSM for hopkins was playing d3 basketball the last 3 years. he seems to be holding up fine with the rigors of a d1 sport. no signs of crumbling into dust yet!

I’m speaking of an entire D3 team, not the occasional outlier who may be a first team AA that could possibly play D1. Furthermore what does D3 basketball have to do with lacrosse, totally different sport that’s not potentially as physical.

[MA Lax Fan]

Just a thought on D3 v D1. If you look at a team like Syracuse and the size of those guys and then look at a Tufts roster - I think there is going to be a difference that would show up in the score box. If you have seen Syracuse get off the bus, they look like a football team.

I love Tufts and I have complete and total respect for them regardless of Division but I think size would be a factor when you compare D1 to top D3.

Just my opinion.

[Lax3]

A full D3 team/roster at the very top of the division would get annihilated by a top 30 D1 team. Blown out of the arena. Might hang in there for a while with 31-50 roster but not for long. Size, speed, quickness, depth differential would get exposed very quickly. Again - that’s not to slight D3. It’s just reality. Every D3 coach in America will tell you that if they can grab 1 or 2 borderline D1 kids each season then they’ll be very, very good. That’s what they’re trying to do - grab a few low D1 kids to bolster their roster.

[georgeoar394]

Just a thought on D3 v D1. If you look at a team like Syracuse and the size of those guys and then look at a Tufts roster - I think there is going to be a difference that would show up in the score box. If you have seen Syracuse get off the bus, they look like a football team.

I love Tufts and I have complete and total respect for them regardless of Division but I think size would be a factor when you compare D1 to top D3.

Just my opinion.

Agreed. The past few years Tufts roster has been on the smaller size. However you look at Uppy, Bailey and Beau’s years that’s a different story

[44WeWantMore]

Spot on with your remarks concerning a top 5 D3 team’s ability to hang at the D1 level. Yes, occasionally a particular player( like the Lynchburg kid at High Point currently) May be impactful but they are rare. More importantly is your reference to a playing a complete season. The wear and tear on a D3 team playing a D1 schedule would grind them to dust. This conversation has been thrown around for decades. Play where you are at, be the best you can be,enjoy every moment, it’s over fast.

The starting LSM for hopkins was playing d3 basketball the last 3 years. he seems to be holding up fine with the rigors of a d1 sport. no signs of crumbling into dust yet!

True, but at Episcopal Academy, he was Phillylacrosse.com Player of the Year as a senior, so I think he would have been highly recruited at the D1 Lax level.

[JumboFan4]

A full D3 team/roster at the very top of the division would get annihilated by a top 30 D1 team. Blown out of the arena. Might hang in there for a while with 31-50 roster but not for long. Size, speed, quickness, depth differential would get exposed very quickly. Again - that’s not to slight D3. It’s just reality. Every D3 coach in America will tell you that if they can grab 1 or 2 borderline D1 kids each season then they’ll be very, very good. That’s what they’re trying to do - grab a few low D1 kids to bolster their roster.

There are guys on this forum that know a lot more about this stuff than I do, and I'll admit that a lot of the commentary has made me second guess my initial position, but I would say that Tufts and probably 1-2 other teams like Salisbury or RIT, specifically, have the depth to compete with top 30 D1 teams. Look at the Tufts roster last year. After Adam, Bredahl, Treiber, and Walbdaum (6'2'' 235, btw) you had underclassmen like Kelleher, Bruun, Alf and Boyden. These were 2nd or 3rd line guys, but from marquee HS programs and got all the high school accolades. They had an AA faceoff guy in Helfrich, followed by Aidan Hesse, who was the MVP of the UA AA game and this year they have Tsetsekos, who was a 4-star recruit, as the third guy in the rotation. In terms of size, Bredahl and Adam, as well as Shanks are/were on the smaller side, but I'd take those 3 based on speed and quickness over bigger guys. On D the size, speed and depth really isn't lacking either. All 3 starting poles are 6'2-6'5'' or bigger and 195 to 215 and there are a ton of depth guys at 6 foot or taller. Maybe the back third of their roster couldn't play D1, but I don't think depth for first and second line is a problem. D-III lax is also one of the few sports in which the teams play more games than D-I schools, so between their depth and the number of games played I can't really fathom this team specifically getting ground to dust or whatever.

[FCIAC LAX]

A full D3 team/roster at the very top of the division would get annihilated by a top 30 D1 team. Blown out of the arena. Might hang in there for a while with 31-50 roster but not for long. Size, speed, quickness, depth differential would get exposed very quickly. Again - that’s not to slight D3. It’s just reality. Every D3 coach in America will tell you that if they can grab 1 or 2 borderline D1 kids each season then they’ll be very, very good. That’s what they’re trying to do - grab a few low D1 kids to bolster their roster.

I agree if you are talking "Cuse/Duke/ND, but I've been watching the Fairfield games this year against Delaware, Providence & Layfayette and Tufts would roll all of them. I am certainly not a Tufts fan, but they averaged 80 shots/25 goals a game last year, putting up 25 vs Amherst.

Maybe its the rust from not playing, but I'm not impressed with any of those D1 teams, too many turnovers, bad shots and general lack of hustle.

Can't say a NESCAC team like Weslyan (not a fan either) is grabbing a few borderline D1 kids, 6 kids from Chaminade and more from the top Private/Founder's league schools. I know the waterboy at Chaminade gets D1 looks & every kid from a school like Deerfield is recruited before they step on the field for them.

I get what you are saying, but a kid like Colin Minicus gets recruited by every top D1 program out of HS, goes to Amherst & gets drafted in the MLL, he's undersized as well.....

I don't think that's an anomaly, just a shift to the D1 talent, D3 lifestyle movement I see going on