Coaching Carousel

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Agreed! What a ludicrous statement. Cuse overcame ridiculous odds and Asa had a stellar career. Only two teams make it to the dance. And one has to lose. To put a loss in one player shows ignorance. TEAMS win and/or lose a game. You get in net. Let’s see how you fare

Obviously you liked Asa as a Goalie, but you really need to check the career stats and then decide if you want to use the word 'Stellar'.

Asa was good for one insane-heave-downfield-for-a-turnover per game. Good goalie though.

[LarryGamLax]

Agreed! What a ludicrous statement. Cuse overcame ridiculous odds and Asa had a stellar career. Only two teams make it to the dance. And one has to lose. To put a loss in one player shows ignorance. TEAMS win and/or lose a game. You get in net. Let’s see how you fare

Obviously you liked Asa as a Goalie, but you really need to check the career stats and then decide if you want to use the word 'Stellar'.

Asa was good for one insane-heave-downfield-for-a-turnover per game. Good goalie though.

Your definition of "Good Goalie" is obviously skewered. Go look at the D1 Top 10 Goalies for 2021 and then get back to me.

[Cagekeeper]

Agreed! What a ludicrous statement. Cuse overcame ridiculous odds and Asa had a stellar career. Only two teams make it to the dance. And one has to lose. To put a loss in one player shows ignorance. TEAMS win and/or lose a game. You get in net. Let’s see how you fare

Obviously you liked Asa as a Goalie, but you really need to check the career stats and then decide if you want to use the word 'Stellar'.

Asa was good for one insane-heave-downfield-for-a-turnover per game. Good goalie though.

100% made some poor decisions. But fun to watch. I appreciate any goalie at this level.

[LarryGamLax]

Asa goldstock asst coach at usc

An average goalie being hired to coach. One could say the championship game was lost by bad goalie play…seems like they should’ve have gone with someone with actual success to their name as a coach. Especially with this being SC…

A player that gets to the national championship on a team that was 17-4 beating several top 10 teams was not successful? You statement seems to indicate that the only ones who have actual success are those that win national championships. that is the only conclusion one can make reading the above post. If that is the case then that is absolute rubbish.

Do we wanna look at the stats? Especially against top 10-20 competition? I have a feeling the stats are worse then the general ‘eye test’

OK for the teams that were ranked in the top 10 at the time they played. Ms Goldstock had a goals against of 148 vs saves of 118 for a percentage of .443. Her opponents had a goals against of 212 with 109 saves. That is a save percentage of.340. In the w losses Ms Goldstocks percentage was .26 (UNC #1), .18 (BC #1)(should be noted that in this game it was 14-13 with both goalies making 4 saves), .55 (UNC #2) and .47 (BC #4). Clearly she had poor days in the losses in the first games to both BC and UNC. Her second losses to the two are very respectable being over 55% vs UNC in the ACC final and just under 50% for the BC final. Not great but not horrific.

If you compare Ms. Goldstocks stat line with the 3 other IWLCA AA's it is comparable but as you would expect not quite as good as the other three.
Ms Moreno had a 123 GA with a save percentage of .546. Ms Deehan had a 202 GA with a save percentage of .453. Ms. Reznick had a 117 GA with a save percentage of .567. Ms. Goldstock had 194 GA with a save percentage of .438. So her stat line seems awfully similar to the first team AA Deehan. (you can argue who should be what with AA, I am just using the list as is.)

Interesting in that Goldstock saw 13 more FPS than any of the other AA goalies and a whopping 57 more than Ms Marino. All three AA goalies had similar FPS save percentages ranging from 55%-58%...except Marino's 67%

Note: stats are just a back of the envelope calculations......not checked and rechecked so there may be some errors.

I think her stats are in line with other top goalies. The stat line also says little about her leadership and her abilities out of the cage passing.

Again, all this is a completely moot point since I do not think a great coach has to be a great player.

Ms Deehan had ZERO Business making All-American. 45% is not good goaltending in this Sport unless you're lowering the standards of good. Meghan Taylor(MD) was very good. Chris Lindsey(Georgetown) was Great. Jess Wilk(MD) was Great. Meg Dentler(George Mason) was outstanding. Go check out their career Save Pct and compare them to the 45% of Deehan.
And don't tell yourself that "those Goalies couldn't play in today's game"...I will laugh in your face and question your knowledge and sanity.

[Bart]

Asa goldstock asst coach at usc

An average goalie being hired to coach. One could say the championship game was lost by bad goalie play…seems like they should’ve have gone with someone with actual success to their name as a coach. Especially with this being SC…

A player that gets to the national championship on a team that was 17-4 beating several top 10 teams was not successful? You statement seems to indicate that the only ones who have actual success are those that win national championships. that is the only conclusion one can make reading the above post. If that is the case then that is absolute rubbish.

Do we wanna look at the stats? Especially against top 10-20 competition? I have a feeling the stats are worse then the general ‘eye test’

OK for the teams that were ranked in the top 10 at the time they played. Ms Goldstock had a goals against of 148 vs saves of 118 for a percentage of .443. Her opponents had a goals against of 212 with 109 saves. That is a save percentage of.340. In the w losses Ms Goldstocks percentage was .26 (UNC #1), .18 (BC #1)(should be noted that in this game it was 14-13 with both goalies making 4 saves), .55 (UNC #2) and .47 (BC #4). Clearly she had poor days in the losses in the first games to both BC and UNC. Her second losses to the two are very respectable being over 55% vs UNC in the ACC final and just under 50% for the BC final. Not great but not horrific.

If you compare Ms. Goldstocks stat line with the 3 other IWLCA AA's it is comparable but as you would expect not quite as good as the other three.
Ms Moreno had a 123 GA with a save percentage of .546. Ms Deehan had a 202 GA with a save percentage of .453. Ms. Reznick had a 117 GA with a save percentage of .567. Ms. Goldstock had 194 GA with a save percentage of .438. So her stat line seems awfully similar to the first team AA Deehan. (you can argue who should be what with AA, I am just using the list as is.)

Interesting in that Goldstock saw 13 more FPS than any of the other AA goalies and a whopping 57 more than Ms Marino. All three AA goalies had similar FPS save percentages ranging from 55%-58%...except Marino's 67%

Note: stats are just a back of the envelope calculations......not checked and rechecked so there may be some errors.

I think her stats are in line with other top goalies. The stat line also says little about her leadership and her abilities out of the cage passing.

Again, all this is a completely moot point since I do not think a great coach has to be a great player.

Ms Deehan had ZERO Business making All-American. 45% is not good goaltending in this Sport unless you're lowering the standards of good. Meghan Taylor(MD) was very good. Chris Lindsey(Georgetown) was Great. Jess Wilk(MD) was Great. Meg Dentler(George Mason) was outstanding. Go check out their career Save Pct and compare them to the 45% of Deehan.
And don't tell yourself that "those Goalies couldn't play in today's game"...I will laugh in your face and question your knowledge and sanity.

Was only bringing up other goalies as a comparison from last year. It was NOT a historical perspective.

As for Ms Deehan…..good thing your vote did not count

[LarryGamLax]

Agreed! What a ludicrous statement. Cuse overcame ridiculous odds and Asa had a stellar career. Only two teams make it to the dance. And one has to lose. To put a loss in one player shows ignorance. TEAMS win and/or lose a game. You get in net. Let’s see how you fare

Obviously you liked Asa as a Goalie, but you really need to check the career stats and then decide if you want to use the word 'Stellar'.

Asa was good for one insane-heave-downfield-for-a-turnover per game. Good goalie though.

100% made some poor decisions. But fun to watch. I appreciate any goalie at this level.

If we really believe in equality, then why do we seem to accept lower standards for female Lacrosse players? A 45% goalie in Men's Lacrosse is considered a) a backup or b) not very good. Never seen a Men's Goalie with that kind of Pct be selected an All-American, but that's considered such in the Women's game. Why is that?

Just askin!

[hmmm]

Agreed! What a ludicrous statement. Cuse overcame ridiculous odds and Asa had a stellar career. Only two teams make it to the dance. And one has to lose. To put a loss in one player shows ignorance. TEAMS win and/or lose a game. You get in net. Let’s see how you fare

Obviously you liked Asa as a Goalie, but you really need to check the career stats and then decide if you want to use the word 'Stellar'.

Asa was good for one insane-heave-downfield-for-a-turnover per game. Good goalie though.

100% made some poor decisions. But fun to watch. I appreciate any goalie at this level.

If we really believe in equality, then why do we seem to accept lower standards for female Lacrosse players? A 45% goalie in Men's Lacrosse is considered a) a backup or b) not very good. Never seen a Men's Goalie with that kind of Pct be selected an All-American, but that's considered such in the Women's game. Why is that?

Just askin!

Women's keepers typically always have lower save % than their male counterparts. This is due to where shots are coming from. In women's lacrosse most shots are coming from much closer to the goal than in men's lacrosse. Not to mention FP goals which there is no equivalency to in men's. That said Asa's numbers aren't very good.

[Idontknowtherules]

Agreed! What a ludicrous statement. Cuse overcame ridiculous odds and Asa had a stellar career. Only two teams make it to the dance. And one has to lose. To put a loss in one player shows ignorance. TEAMS win and/or lose a game. You get in net. Let’s see how you fare

Obviously you liked Asa as a Goalie, but you really need to check the career stats and then decide if you want to use the word 'Stellar'.

Asa was good for one insane-heave-downfield-for-a-turnover per game. Good goalie though.

100% made some poor decisions. But fun to watch. I appreciate any goalie at this level.

If we really believe in equality, then why do we seem to accept lower standards for female Lacrosse players? A 45% goalie in Men's Lacrosse is considered a) a backup or b) not very good. Never seen a Men's Goalie with that kind of Pct be selected an All-American, but that's considered such in the Women's game. Why is that?

Just askin!

Women's keepers typically always have lower save % than their male counterparts. This is due to where shots are coming from. In women's lacrosse most shots are coming from much closer to the goal than in men's lacrosse. Not to mention FP goals which there is no equivalency to in men's. That said Asa's numbers aren't very good.

I was just about to say. Men don’t take free position shots. That’s a 50/50 chance I would say a team like Cuse that fouls a lot. Or at least gets called for it a lot. Doesn’t help asa’s case

[LarryGamLax]

Agreed! What a ludicrous statement. Cuse overcame ridiculous odds and Asa had a stellar career. Only two teams make it to the dance. And one has to lose. To put a loss in one player shows ignorance. TEAMS win and/or lose a game. You get in net. Let’s see how you fare

Obviously you liked Asa as a Goalie, but you really need to check the career stats and then decide if you want to use the word 'Stellar'.

Asa was good for one insane-heave-downfield-for-a-turnover per game. Good goalie though.

100% made some poor decisions. But fun to watch. I appreciate any goalie at this level.

If we really believe in equality, then why do we seem to accept lower standards for female Lacrosse players? A 45% goalie in Men's Lacrosse is considered a) a backup or b) not very good. Never seen a Men's Goalie with that kind of Pct be selected an All-American, but that's considered such in the Women's game. Why is that?

Just askin!

Women's keepers typically always have lower save % than their male counterparts. This is due to where shots are coming from. In women's lacrosse most shots are coming from much closer to the goal than in men's lacrosse. Not to mention FP goals which there is no equivalency to in men's. That said Asa's numbers aren't very good.

That's strange. Taylor Moreno, Sarah Reznick, Michelle Messenger, and Paula Difatta seemed to do just fine with Save Pcts. anywhere from .567 to .529. Only Taylor and Sarah actually made the AA teams, the other two...Oh Well! However, Bridget Deehan made First Team AA(along with Moreno) with a Sv. Pct. of .453 HUH! That couldn't happen on the Men's side if you bribed someone.
Most shots in Women's Lacrosse still come from 6 meters or less. The FP shot is unique, but it is also an opportunity for a talented trained Goalie to shine. More shots are coming from Farther out due to stick technology, but good solid fundamentals and technique can still rule the day. Those things are sorely missing from many goalies today on both sides.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Wow, 67% save rate on FPSs is incredible, and with no intent to diminish that excellence I have to at least partially attribute that to poor shooting. No way, in my book, should FPS shooters be shooting at a 33% success rate. My girls are spending a whole lot of time on the eight meter line learning how to put the ball by the GK on a 1v1 situation if that's the case. Gotta have those. These numbers should be reversed, 67% success rate, 33% save rate.

Agreed. NU’s Lauren Gilbert is a stellar example. Check out her FPS/G % from ‘21

She has something that nearly all women's lacrosse players don't quite have: Division 1 track and field type speed. Her top end is very fast. I always thought she'd make a very good college midfielder. But at the FPS line, she gets off the hash unbelievably fast and gets under the defenders and their sticks.

As long as she came up, I thought you might enjoy this feature on Gilbert that westcoastlax posted a little while back:

Nice tribute to one of my favorite players: Lauren Gilbert

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ci3BnIl5vlg

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Wow, 67% save rate on FPSs is incredible, and with no intent to diminish that excellence I have to at least partially attribute that to poor shooting. No way, in my book, should FPS shooters be shooting at a 33% success rate. My girls are spending a whole lot of time on the eight meter line learning how to put the ball by the GK on a 1v1 situation if that's the case. Gotta have those. These numbers should be reversed, 67% success rate, 33% save rate.

Charlotte North fits here. She scored 12 goals on 18 FPS last year. 19 of 28 in 2019; 8 of 14 2018 rookie season. Interesting stat to look up on the NCAA website.

https://www.ncaa.com/stats/lacrosse-wom ... vidual/995

[Bart]

Agreed! What a ludicrous statement. Cuse overcame ridiculous odds and Asa had a stellar career. Only two teams make it to the dance. And one has to lose. To put a loss in one player shows ignorance. TEAMS win and/or lose a game. You get in net. Let’s see how you fare

Obviously you liked Asa as a Goalie, but you really need to check the career stats and then decide if you want to use the word 'Stellar'.

Asa was good for one insane-heave-downfield-for-a-turnover per game. Good goalie though.

100% made some poor decisions. But fun to watch. I appreciate any goalie at this level.

If we really believe in equality, then why do we seem to accept lower standards for female Lacrosse players? A 45% goalie in Men's Lacrosse is considered a) a backup or b) not very good. Never seen a Men's Goalie with that kind of Pct be selected an All-American, but that's considered such in the Women's game. Why is that?

Just askin!

Women's keepers typically always have lower save % than their male counterparts. This is due to where shots are coming from. In women's lacrosse most shots are coming from much closer to the goal than in men's lacrosse. Not to mention FP goals which there is no equivalency to in men's. That said Asa's numbers aren't very good.

That's strange. Taylor Moreno, Sarah Reznick, Michelle Messenger, and Paula Difatta seemed to do just fine with Save Pcts. anywhere from .567 to .529. Only Taylor and Sarah actually made the AA teams, the other two...Oh Well! However, Bridget Deehan made First Team AA(along with Moreno) with a Sv. Pct. of .453 HUH!

No clue with Deehan but I don't make those calls. It should be noted that both her and Ms Goldstock faced almost 100 more shots during the season than did Ms. Reznick and Ms. Moreno. (both very deserving BTW)

But as to you other point, does the competition not matter? Better competition, better shooters perhaps lower save percentage (which makes Ms. Moreno's pct that much more impressive IMO.)

To whit, if you look at all the teams in the NCAA tournament, there are only 16 goalies in the top 50 in save percentage. Out of the 8 total with a save percentage over .5 (I'm not counting Dartmouth goalie) only two made it to the dance...The RMU goalie and the JMU goalie. So if you are going to compare apples to apples I would think you need to compare the save percentage of these goalies versus tournament teams.

Lets use the two goalies you brought up, Ms Defatta from Elon and Ms Messenger from Niagara, whom I have watched for years and think she is a wonderful goalie. In this comparison Ms Difatta played JMU 2x and Towsend 1x in which she had 29 saves on 65 shots on goal or a percentage of .446. Ms. Messenger only played Farfield 2x in which she stopped 16 of the 42 shots she faced for save percentage of .38. In comparison Ms Deehan and Ms Goldstock had a save percentage of .443 (123 of 284)and .421 (120 of 285) vs NCAA tournament teams both very similar to Ms. Difatta and Ms. Messenger.

What does this mean? IDK, probably nothing but the fact that it is very difficult to compare goalies just on save percentage. Other than The two at the top of the leader board I really would have a difficult time deciding whom was the next in line.

[Dr. Tact]

Agreed! What a ludicrous statement. Cuse overcame ridiculous odds and Asa had a stellar career. Only two teams make it to the dance. And one has to lose. To put a loss in one player shows ignorance. TEAMS win and/or lose a game. You get in net. Let’s see how you fare

Obviously you liked Asa as a Goalie, but you really need to check the career stats and then decide if you want to use the word 'Stellar'.

Asa was good for one insane-heave-downfield-for-a-turnover per game. Good goalie though.

100% made some poor decisions. But fun to watch. I appreciate any goalie at this level.

If we really believe in equality, then why do we seem to accept lower standards for female Lacrosse players? A 45% goalie in Men's Lacrosse is considered a) a backup or b) not very good. Never seen a Men's Goalie with that kind of Pct be selected an All-American, but that's considered such in the Women's game. Why is that?

Just askin!

Women's keepers typically always have lower save % than their male counterparts. This is due to where shots are coming from. In women's lacrosse most shots are coming from much closer to the goal than in men's lacrosse. Not to mention FP goals which there is no equivalency to in men's. That said Asa's numbers aren't very good.

That's strange. Taylor Moreno, Sarah Reznick, Michelle Messenger, and Paula Difatta seemed to do just fine with Save Pcts. anywhere from .567 to .529. Only Taylor and Sarah actually made the AA teams, the other two...Oh Well! However, Bridget Deehan made First Team AA(along with Moreno) with a Sv. Pct. of .453 HUH!

No clue with Deehan but I don't make those calls. It should be noted that both her and Ms Goldstock faced almost 100 more shots during the season than did Ms. Reznick and Ms. Moreno. (both very deserving BTW)

But as to you other point, does the competition not matter? Better competition, better shooters perhaps lower save percentage (which makes Ms. Moreno's pct that much more impressive IMO.)

To whit, if you look at all the teams in the NCAA tournament, there are only 16 goalies in the top 50 in save percentage. Out of the 8 total with a save percentage over .5 (I'm not counting Dartmouth goalie) only two made it to the dance...The RMU goalie and the JMU goalie. So if you are going to compare apples to apples I would think you need to compare the save percentage of these goalies versus tournament teams.

Lets use the two goalies you brought up, Ms Defatta from Elon and Ms Messenger from Niagara, whom I have watched for years and think she is a wonderful goalie. In this comparison Ms Difatta played JMU 2x and Towsend 1x in which she had 29 saves on 65 shots on goal or a percentage of .446. Ms. Messenger only played Farfield 2x in which she stopped 16 of the 42 shots she faced for save percentage of .38. In comparison Ms Deehan and Ms Goldstock had a save percentage of .443 (123 of 284)and .421 (120 of 285) vs NCAA tournament teams both very similar to Ms. Difatta and Ms. Messenger.

What does this mean? IDK, probably nothing but the fact that it is very difficult to compare goalies just on save percentage. Other than The two at the top of the leader board I really would have a difficult time deciding whom was the next in line.

OK some real world experience derived from D. She absolutely did not like playing against Asa. She didn't have that feeling about any other goalie out there. Now, was it more mental on the D's side of the equation? I dont know, probably. Whatever it was, she felt she had a very hard time scoring against her....So my sense/eye test is she is a good goalie that could be great at times. I think the trend was to play better than good versus less than good.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Thanks for that fascinating peek behind the scenes, Doc. Absolute gold when a player shares like that.

[LarryGamLax]

Dr. Tact and Bart...you both made some good points. The problem I still hear is that if you don't go to certain schools and play in certain conferences, then your accomplishments are insignificant. Everyone does not want to attend a school in the Power 5 nor should they be required to do so. I have been fighting for this thing called RESPECT since I have been involved in Women's Athletics.

There are over 117 schools that play D1 Lacrosse, 114 in D2, and 293 in D3. I have been lucky enough in my 28+ years as a Personal trainer to work with a lot of talented athletes. Some were more gifted than others, but most worked hard and went on to college to play Field Hockey, Basketball, or Lacrosse at one of the 3 NCAA levels. Very proud of all of them. I NEVER looked down on any of them and where they chose to attend school and play. I didn't say I liked all of the choices, but I always supported the girls. I know how good my clients were(are) and I just wanted them to make good choices. For the most part it has worked out quite well. That's the RESPECT I want all of the players to have. If Charlotte North had decided to leave Duke and gone to Jacksonville instead of BC, would you all be raving about her talent OR would you be doing that smirking dismissal of her because Jacksonville plays in the ASUN conference? Talent is Talent. Just like Coaching is Coaching. You either have talent or you don't. You either can coach or you can't.

How many of you have heard of the following D2 players...Demmianne Cook, Claire Petersen Cannetti, Frankie Caridi?
Let me tell you about a girl named Hunter Isnardi. She played at Mercy College(class of 2019) and was a 3X 1st team All-American, the top offensive player in D2 in her Jr. and Sr. years. She's the All-time leading scorer in the history in D2. A complete Lacrosse Badass! I watched her play several times and I tell you that if she played at a top 20 D1 team, she would be a significant player. She was just simply talented and outstanding. So why didn't she go D1? I don't know, but she made her situation work to the zenith for her. My point...do not try to dismiss Hunter because she chose to go to a D2. It's a choice, not a condemnation.

I have 3 clients who are going to D1 schools this Fall. One is a Transfer, the other two will be Freshmen. The Transfer is going to a Power 5 conference and the others will be at 2nd level conferences. My wish and hope is that ALL do well academically and Athletically. That's always my goal, all the time with every client.

[TNLAX]

Dr. Tact and Bart...you both made some good points. The problem I still hear is that if you don't go to certain schools and play in certain conferences, then your accomplishments are insignificant. Everyone does not want to attend a school in the Power 5 nor should they be required to do so. I have been fighting for this thing called RESPECT since I have been involved in Women's Athletics.

There are over 117 schools that play D1 Lacrosse, 114 in D2, and 293 in D3. I have been lucky enough in my 28+ years as a Personal trainer to work with a lot of talented athletes. Some were more gifted than others, but most worked hard and went on to college to play Field Hockey, Basketball, or Lacrosse at one of the 3 NCAA levels. Very proud of all of them. I NEVER looked down on any of them and where they chose to attend school and play. I didn't say I liked all of the choices, but I always supported the girls. I know how good my clients were(are) and I just wanted them to make good choices. For the most part it has worked out quite well. That's the RESPECT I want all of the players to have. If Charlotte North had decided to leave Duke and gone to Jacksonville instead of BC, would you all be raving about her talent OR would you be doing that smirking dismissal of her because Jacksonville plays in the ASUN conference? Talent is Talent. Just like Coaching is Coaching. You either have talent or you don't. You either can coach or you can't.

How many of you have heard of the following D2 players...Demmianne Cook, Claire Petersen Cannetti, Frankie Caridi?
Let me tell you about a girl named Hunter Isnardi. She played at Mercy College(class of 2019) and was a 3X 1st team All-American, the top offensive player in D2 in her Jr. and Sr. years. She's the All-time leading scorer in the history in D2. A complete Lacrosse Badass! I watched her play several times and I tell you that if she played at a top 20 D1 team, she would be a significant player. She was just simply talented and outstanding. So why didn't she go D1? I don't know, but she made her situation work to the zenith for her. My point...do not try to dismiss Hunter because she chose to go to a D2. It's a choice, not a condemnation.

I have 3 clients who are going to D1 schools this Fall. One is a Transfer, the other two will be Freshmen. The Transfer is going to a Power 5 conference and the others will be at 2nd level conferences. My wish and hope is that ALL do well academically and Athletically. That's always my goal, all the time with every client.

Well said

[Bart]

Dr. Tact and Bart...you both made some good points. The problem I still hear is that if you don't go to certain schools and play in certain conferences, then your accomplishments are insignificant. Everyone does not want to attend a school in the Power 5 nor should they be required to do so. I have been fighting for this thing called RESPECT since I have been involved in Women's Athletics.

There are over 117 schools that play D1 Lacrosse, 114 in D2, and 293 in D3. I have been lucky enough in my 28+ years as a Personal trainer to work with a lot of talented athletes. Some were more gifted than others, but most worked hard and went on to college to play Field Hockey, Basketball, or Lacrosse at one of the 3 NCAA levels. Very proud of all of them. I NEVER looked down on any of them and where they chose to attend school and play. I didn't say I liked all of the choices, but I always supported the girls. I know how good my clients were(are) and I just wanted them to make good choices. For the most part it has worked out quite well. That's the RESPECT I want all of the players to have. If Charlotte North had decided to leave Duke and gone to Jacksonville instead of BC, would you all be raving about her talent OR would you be doing that smirking dismissal of her because Jacksonville plays in the ASUN conference? Talent is Talent. Just like Coaching is Coaching. You either have talent or you don't. You either can coach or you can't.

How many of you have heard of the following D2 players...Demmianne Cook, Claire Petersen Cannetti, Frankie Caridi?
Let me tell you about a girl named Hunter Isnardi. She played at Mercy College(class of 2019) and was a 3X 1st team All-American, the top offensive player in D2 in her Jr. and Sr. years. She's the All-time leading scorer in the history in D2. A complete Lacrosse Badass! I watched her play several times and I tell you that if she played at a top 20 D1 team, she would be a significant player. She was just simply talented and outstanding. So why didn't she go D1? I don't know, but she made her situation work to the zenith for her. My point...do not try to dismiss Hunter because she chose to go to a D2. It's a choice, not a condemnation.

I have 3 clients who are going to D1 schools this Fall. One is a Transfer, the other two will be Freshmen. The Transfer is going to a Power 5 conference and the others will be at 2nd level conferences. My wish and hope is that ALL do well academically and Athletically. That's always my goal, all the time with every client.

I do not know where in my post you got disrespect from. The point is that there are numbers and there are numbers. Competition matters.

BTW, I know the D2 players you speak. I also know of Isnardi and have watched her play in person. Good player and Mercy certainly allowed her to develop. There are lots of very good players at the D2 level. Many talented kids play there and many will continue to do so. If anyone thinks there is no talent in the other two divisions then they are just hot paying attention.

[Dr. Tact]

Dr. Tact and Bart...you both made some good points. The problem I still hear is that if you don't go to certain schools and play in certain conferences, then your accomplishments are insignificant. Everyone does not want to attend a school in the Power 5 nor should they be required to do so. I have been fighting for this thing called RESPECT since I have been involved in Women's Athletics.

There are over 117 schools that play D1 Lacrosse, 114 in D2, and 293 in D3. I have been lucky enough in my 28+ years as a Personal trainer to work with a lot of talented athletes. Some were more gifted than others, but most worked hard and went on to college to play Field Hockey, Basketball, or Lacrosse at one of the 3 NCAA levels. Very proud of all of them. I NEVER looked down on any of them and where they chose to attend school and play. I didn't say I liked all of the choices, but I always supported the girls. I know how good my clients were(are) and I just wanted them to make good choices. For the most part it has worked out quite well. That's the RESPECT I want all of the players to have. If Charlotte North had decided to leave Duke and gone to Jacksonville instead of BC, would you all be raving about her talent OR would you be doing that smirking dismissal of her because Jacksonville plays in the ASUN conference? Talent is Talent. Just like Coaching is Coaching. You either have talent or you don't. You either can coach or you can't.

How many of you have heard of the following D2 players...Demmianne Cook, Claire Petersen Cannetti, Frankie Caridi?
Let me tell you about a girl named Hunter Isnardi. She played at Mercy College(class of 2019) and was a 3X 1st team All-American, the top offensive player in D2 in her Jr. and Sr. years. She's the All-time leading scorer in the history in D2. A complete Lacrosse Badass! I watched her play several times and I tell you that if she played at a top 20 D1 team, she would be a significant player. She was just simply talented and outstanding. So why didn't she go D1? I don't know, but she made her situation work to the zenith for her. My point...do not try to dismiss Hunter because she chose to go to a D2. It's a choice, not a condemnation.

I have 3 clients who are going to D1 schools this Fall. One is a Transfer, the other two will be Freshmen. The Transfer is going to a Power 5 conference and the others will be at 2nd level conferences. My wish and hope is that ALL do well academically and Athletically. That's always my goal, all the time with every client.

Larry - I get it. Thanks for sharing.

As you probably know, I have one D1 and soon one D3. Truth be told, lacrosse was the primary reason behind their college choices. Both had an open book of academic only choices, but tailored where they went to go with analysis of Lax/Academics/Social/Etc.

So, I am in the camp that 5th year players (more than regular transfers) don't owe their undergrad school anything if they want a change. Whether that change is based on academics/social/lax/location/etc. I don't care. Secondly, here is where I may disagree with you, I don't think that the player owes the WLAX community anything at all, related to where they play. If they want to ring chase, great. If they want to chill but still play with a completely different environment/coach/team, cool. If they want to help build a program, for whatever reason, go for it. I don't think they should be questioned about their choice and certainly are not responsible for taking their talents to an "up and coming program" just to serve the greater good. I kind of agree that honesty would be good with their public statements, if offered. But I would think its very hard to be honest and say "I am going to X University 'chasing a ring', I really don't care about academics/social/etc."

To answer your question, I do not know those D2 ladies. I applaud them for taking their talents to D2 and hope it was rewarding for them on all levels. I believe in Gladwell's big fish/small pond theory and I love to hear about players that were successful in a smaller (public awareness) situation. I agree with you, not knowing anything about Ms. Isnardi, she would most likely been a studette at any level. A studette is a studette and it is a shame that D2/D3 athletes don't get the press/love. That said, she is likely a very successful person post-lax and that is what it is all about, right?

The "quotes" are my statements, not yours.

[8meterPA]

Dr. Tact and Bart...you both made some good points. The problem I still hear is that if you don't go to certain schools and play in certain conferences, then your accomplishments are insignificant. Everyone does not want to attend a school in the Power 5 nor should they be required to do so. I have been fighting for this thing called RESPECT since I have been involved in Women's Athletics.

There are over 117 schools that play D1 Lacrosse, 114 in D2, and 293 in D3. I have been lucky enough in my 28+ years as a Personal trainer to work with a lot of talented athletes. Some were more gifted than others, but most worked hard and went on to college to play Field Hockey, Basketball, or Lacrosse at one of the 3 NCAA levels. Very proud of all of them. I NEVER looked down on any of them and where they chose to attend school and play. I didn't say I liked all of the choices, but I always supported the girls. I know how good my clients were(are) and I just wanted them to make good choices. For the most part it has worked out quite well. That's the RESPECT I want all of the players to have. If Charlotte North had decided to leave Duke and gone to Jacksonville instead of BC, would you all be raving about her talent OR would you be doing that smirking dismissal of her because Jacksonville plays in the ASUN conference? Talent is Talent. Just like Coaching is Coaching. You either have talent or you don't. You either can coach or you can't.

How many of you have heard of the following D2 players...Demmianne Cook, Claire Petersen Cannetti, Frankie Caridi?
Let me tell you about a girl named Hunter Isnardi. She played at Mercy College(class of 2019) and was a 3X 1st team All-American, the top offensive player in D2 in her Jr. and Sr. years. She's the All-time leading scorer in the history in D2. A complete Lacrosse Badass! I watched her play several times and I tell you that if she played at a top 20 D1 team, she would be a significant player. She was just simply talented and outstanding. So why didn't she go D1? I don't know, but she made her situation work to the zenith for her. My point...do not try to dismiss Hunter because she chose to go to a D2. It's a choice, not a condemnation.

I have 3 clients who are going to D1 schools this Fall. One is a Transfer, the other two will be Freshmen. The Transfer is going to a Power 5 conference and the others will be at 2nd level conferences. My wish and hope is that ALL do well academically and Athletically. That's always my goal, all the time with every client.

Larry, I think you should pose your question to the IWLCA, Inside Lacrosse, US Lacrosse and other organizations and lacrosse clubs that can directly influence and promote not only the top 10 D1 teams but all 110 D1 teams, D2 teams and D3 teams. If there is a perceived lack of respect of teams and players in the bottom 100 D1 teams, D2 teams and D3 teams it's because the previously mentioned organizations only focus and promote the top 10 teams and players like CN.

I think most individual posters on here understand that literally every team in D1 ranked from #21 - #110 has at least 1 player that could be on the roster of a top 10 team and that there are plenty of D2 & D3 players who could fit in very well on D1 teams.

My question to you would be how many players from D2 or D3 schools were invited to tryout for the US team? How many D2 or D3 schools were invited or drafted for athletes unlimited teams or the other failed women's pro teams? The problem is at the top of the women's lax world and the publications and talking heads that follow them. How do you think D2 & D3 schools would be perceived if the us lax team invited those players to tryouts and actually rostered a few? Guessing it may help change that perception that you alluding to.

[Dr. Tact]

My question to you would be how many players from D2 or D3 schools were invited to tryout for the US team? How many D2 or D3 schools were invited or drafted for athletes unlimited teams or the other failed women's pro teams? The problem is at the top of the women's lax world and the publications and talking heads that follow them. How do you think D2 & D3 schools would be perceived if the us lax team invited those players to tryouts and actually rostered a few? Guessing it may help change that perception that you alluding to.

This is a great comment. Thank you 8meter.