Recruiting, the exact science

[Laxdad2021]

it's october 12 and we have the first '25 on the board. fwiw, it looks like he can play.
https://twitter.com/tyxanders/status/15 ... Jv7jA&s=19
and here we are.

He is re-class. Could be the UVA is stacking so many higher stars that he going the PG route to try and get playing time.

the push forward has been part of the discussion here.

He isn’t re-classing to look good against younger kids.

Right.
He already has the commitment, apparently.
If there was transparency about age and other attributes, it might well be obvious as to the logic of taking an extra year before college.
Could be he's relatively young, could be he'd benefit from more advanced academic preparation, who knows...it's a different path than doing a red shirt year, which is the more usual option if a coach simply wants to stockpile a player.

Except Red Shirting cost the school $$$ for the kid’s scholarship. You only get 12.6/year. By PGing school gets a kid a year older without the cost of using scholarship dollars.

[Laxdad2021]

What I am seeing is that at one time LI, Baltimore and a limited Upstate NY were the hubs of youth lax. It’s now moving to Southern CT. Darian, Greenwich, New Canaan and the like. Rich parents see Lax as a way for their child to get into a high academic school. Kid with a 1330 SAT and 95 average has zero chance of going to Harvard or Yale or other high end academic schools. Same kid who rocks it at Lax gets into those same schools.
These parents don’t care about $$$ and the cost of a private school education. They’ve been paying more per year to send their kid to Taft, Salisbury, Deerfield and other NE Prep schools. They are willing to pay for a PG year or a repeat grade to get their kid into these types of high academic schools.
They believe that the school will get their kid a better job and a better life down the road. They are probably correct.
Just look at how the club programs from that area have flourished over the past five years.
Just another reason why the general public looks at lax like they look at squash and crew: Rich white person sport.

[smoova]

Rich parents see Lax as a way for their child to get into a high academic school ...

Just another reason why the general public looks at lax like they look at squash and crew: Rich white person sport.

Bingo - the reclass racket has cemented lacrosse's role as affirmative action for upper-class, white kids.

[MDlaxfan76]

it's october 12 and we have the first '25 on the board. fwiw, it looks like he can play.
https://twitter.com/tyxanders/status/15 ... Jv7jA&s=19
and here we are.

He is re-class. Could be the UVA is stacking so many higher stars that he going the PG route to try and get playing time.

the push forward has been part of the discussion here.

He isn’t re-classing to look good against younger kids.

Right.
He already has the commitment, apparently.
If there was transparency about age and other attributes, it might well be obvious as to the logic of taking an extra year before college.
Could be he's relatively young, could be he'd benefit from more advanced academic preparation, who knows...it's a different path than doing a red shirt year, which is the more usual option if a coach simply wants to stockpile a player.

Except Red Shirting cost the school $$$ for the kid’s scholarship. You only get 12.6/year. By PGing school gets a kid a year older without the cost of using scholarship dollars.

As we never went through this with our son nor did any of my other family, I could well be mistaken, but seems to me that the PG year (unless a significant scholarship from the prep school) is quite costly to the family. I don't think (again, no personal experience) that a kid in college needs to be allocated a scholarship if redshirted (though they could get a piece). Spreading out the college payments over 5 years, instead of four, is how much more costly than the straight four? Do you not take an off term or two along the way, get the credits needed but spread out? Do an internship, etc? Is it pretty much a direct tradeoff with the extra prep tuition? (these prep schools get darn expensive!).

I'm definitely not in the know on this...but interested to understand.

[MDlaxfan76]

What I am seeing is that at one time LI, Baltimore and a limited Upstate NY were the hubs of youth lax. It’s now moving to Southern CT. Darian, Greenwich, New Canaan and the like. Rich parents see Lax as a way for their child to get into a high academic school. Kid with a 1330 SAT and 95 average has zero chance of going to Harvard or Yale or other high end academic schools. Same kid who rocks it at Lax gets into those same schools.
These parents don’t care about $$$ and the cost of a private school education. They’ve been paying more per year to send their kid to Taft, Salisbury, Deerfield and other NE Prep schools. They are willing to pay for a PG year or a repeat grade to get their kid into these types of high academic schools.
They believe that the school will get their kid a better job and a better life down the road. They are probably correct.
Just look at how the club programs from that area have flourished over the past five years.
Just another reason why the general public looks at lax like they look at squash and crew: Rich white person sport.

hmmm, I dunno about the "moving" part, but the sport has definitely expanded to many wealthier enclaves around the country. (Northeast prep schools have long been a source of lax players going to say Ivy and NESCAC, not exactly a new phenomenon....and the hubs have only multiplied, not moved).

It's accurate that sports are an entry ticket to higher selectivity schools, and it's also accurate to say that those athletes choosing those paths have a pretty darn strong success record on average post college.

But the numbers of such players, from all over the country, has expanded significantly more than the number of slots at the most selective colleges. So, the difficulty of being one of those few selected for those particular schools has gone up a ton...indeed, you hear bitter grousing from some parents who'd assumed that all the dough they'd poured into Johnny's lax status would pay off, when it doesn't result in that selection. Yes, particularly from some of the areas you mention...that, too, isn't really new...in my era in the '70's alums were grousing when their kids didn't get the nod...competitive standards keep going up...and way, way up now. True for the whole school, not just the athletes.

It was interesting, yesterday, to hear the new AD at my alma mater discuss the importance they are placing on helping their coaches recruit from all over the country, the emphasis on contributing to the college's overall objectives, socio-economic, regional diversity, academic and leadership potentials, etc. As a school that couldn't care less about whether a family can pay the freight, they're interested in increasing the pool of athletes they attract, the best possible recruits across dimensions. That's more the case than not at most of the most selective schools.

It's a different dynamic with schools who need those full freight parents to balance the budget...

[Laxdad2021]

it's october 12 and we have the first '25 on the board. fwiw, it looks like he can play.
https://twitter.com/tyxanders/status/15 ... Jv7jA&s=19
and here we are.

He is re-class. Could be the UVA is stacking so many higher stars that he going the PG route to try and get playing time.

the push forward has been part of the discussion here.

He isn’t re-classing to look good against younger kids.

Right.
He already has the commitment, apparently.
If there was transparency about age and other attributes, it might well be obvious as to the logic of taking an extra year before college.
Could be he's relatively young, could be he'd benefit from more advanced academic preparation, who knows...it's a different path than doing a red shirt year, which is the more usual option if a coach simply wants to stockpile a player.

Except Red Shirting cost the school $$$ for the kid’s scholarship. You only get 12.6/year. By PGing school gets a kid a year older without the cost of using scholarship dollars.

As we never went through this with our son nor did any of my other family, I could well be mistaken, but seems to me that the PG year (unless a significant scholarship from the prep school) is quite costly to the family. I don't think (again, no personal experience) that a kid in college needs to be allocated a scholarship if redshirted (though they could get a piece). Spreading out the college payments over 5 years, instead of four, is how much more costly than the straight four? Do you not take an off term or two along the way, get the credits needed but spread out? Do an internship, etc? Is it pretty much a direct tradeoff with the extra prep tuition? (these prep schools get darn expensive!).

I'm definitely not in the know on this...but interested to understand.

Just an example but I know of a 4 Top 100 kid who ended up being asked to PG because there were no spots for him due to COVID. Prep schools across NE wanted him as he was a top 50 player in his class. Basically had five schools bidding against each other for him. Ended up costing his family $10K to attend the prep school which included tuition, room and board. Those schools have a ton of money and if they want you they will do what is necessary to get you.

[MDlaxfan76]

it's october 12 and we have the first '25 on the board. fwiw, it looks like he can play.
https://twitter.com/tyxanders/status/15 ... Jv7jA&s=19
and here we are.

He is re-class. Could be the UVA is stacking so many higher stars that he going the PG route to try and get playing time.

the push forward has been part of the discussion here.

He isn’t re-classing to look good against younger kids.

Right.
He already has the commitment, apparently.
If there was transparency about age and other attributes, it might well be obvious as to the logic of taking an extra year before college.
Could be he's relatively young, could be he'd benefit from more advanced academic preparation, who knows...it's a different path than doing a red shirt year, which is the more usual option if a coach simply wants to stockpile a player.

Except Red Shirting cost the school $$$ for the kid’s scholarship. You only get 12.6/year. By PGing school gets a kid a year older without the cost of using scholarship dollars.

As we never went through this with our son nor did any of my other family, I could well be mistaken, but seems to me that the PG year (unless a significant scholarship from the prep school) is quite costly to the family. I don't think (again, no personal experience) that a kid in college needs to be allocated a scholarship if redshirted (though they could get a piece). Spreading out the college payments over 5 years, instead of four, is how much more costly than the straight four? Do you not take an off term or two along the way, get the credits needed but spread out? Do an internship, etc? Is it pretty much a direct tradeoff with the extra prep tuition? (these prep schools get darn expensive!).

I'm definitely not in the know on this...but interested to understand.

Just an example but I know of a 4 Top 100 kid who ended up being asked to PG because there were no spots for him due to COVID. Prep schools across NE wanted him as he was a top 50 player in his class. Basically had five schools bidding against each other for him. Ended up costing his family $10K to attend the prep school which included tuition, room and board. Those schools have a ton of money and if they want you they will do what is necessary to get you.

yup, totally plausible.
It's why I'm not a fan of PG's for athletic purposes.
If a kid needs some serious extra academic prep, and is an athlete, I get it.
But just to get the slot, definitely ugh...

[middleAgedBear]

it's october 12 and we have the first '25 on the board. fwiw, it looks like he can play.
https://twitter.com/tyxanders/status/15 ... Jv7jA&s=19
and here we are.

He is re-class. Could be the UVA is stacking so many higher stars that he going the PG route to try and get playing time.

the push forward has been part of the discussion here.

He isn’t re-classing to look good against younger kids.

Right.
He already has the commitment, apparently.
If there was transparency about age and other attributes, it might well be obvious as to the logic of taking an extra year before college.
Could be he's relatively young, could be he'd benefit from more advanced academic preparation, who knows...it's a different path than doing a red shirt year, which is the more usual option if a coach simply wants to stockpile a player.

Except Red Shirting cost the school $$$ for the kid’s scholarship. You only get 12.6/year. By PGing school gets a kid a year older without the cost of using scholarship dollars.

As we never went through this with our son nor did any of my other family, I could well be mistaken, but seems to me that the PG year (unless a significant scholarship from the prep school) is quite costly to the family. I don't think (again, no personal experience) that a kid in college needs to be allocated a scholarship if redshirted (though they could get a piece). Spreading out the college payments over 5 years, instead of four, is how much more costly than the straight four? Do you not take an off term or two along the way, get the credits needed but spread out? Do an internship, etc? Is it pretty much a direct tradeoff with the extra prep tuition? (these prep schools get darn expensive!).

I'm definitely not in the know on this...but interested to understand.

Just an example but I know of a 4 Top 100 kid who ended up being asked to PG because there were no spots for him due to COVID. Prep schools across NE wanted him as he was a top 50 player in his class. Basically had five schools bidding against each other for him. Ended up costing his family $10K to attend the prep school which included tuition, room and board. Those schools have a ton of money and if they want you they will do what is necessary to get you.

A relative of mine is doing a PG year at a top NE prep school, pretty much $0. They've got a lot more wiggle room with $$ than most colleges.

[FCCTlaxFan]

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... osse/60381

Some sanity perhaps

club operators probably not going to be the biggest advocates, it seems. usalax fully went along with this even creating their own tournaments and promo (and insurance).

it sounds like they'll do youth because clubs can't promote recruiting @ middle school kids anymore. slimy bunch, i had trouble reading those club guys. b silcott's a stand up guy.

Talked to a club guy who said he sent a small 2025 go down to play with his 2026s because they needed one more….Looked like best player on the field but is Just average on the 2025. Let this coaches wonder why kids stink when they land.

so those youngins played with 10 guys? impressive.

They had no “lefty attack” so he was the “one” sent down to play that specialty spot. I didn’t ask him why he didn’t just play what he had. It came up when I told him it’s easy to look good playing down and he relayed the story from a recent weekend of more club lacrosse….

BTW, he mentioned he trained your guy 3-4 hours a week over the Summer.

Fall Lacrosse is strange. If the 2025 took playing time away from a 2026 it is pretty bad as it just means the 2026 team wanted to win. If the 2026 team really need a body then so be it. Hopefully the defensive players covering the lefty attackman got better and had a fun playing against him.

they didn't need a body. they had enough guys.

That's a shame.

[HooDat]

What I am seeing is that at one time LI, Baltimore and a limited Upstate NY were the hubs of youth lax. It’s now moving to Southern CT. Darian, Greenwich, New Canaan and the like. Rich parents see Lax as a way for their child to get into a high academic school. Kid with a 1330 SAT and 95 average has zero chance of going to Harvard or Yale or other high end academic schools. Same kid who rocks it at Lax gets into those same schools.
These parents don’t care about $$$ and the cost of a private school education. They’ve been paying more per year to send their kid to Taft, Salisbury, Deerfield and other NE Prep schools. They are willing to pay for a PG year or a repeat grade to get their kid into these types of high academic schools.
They believe that the school will get their kid a better job and a better life down the road. They are probably correct.
Just look at how the club programs from that area have flourished over the past five years.
Just another reason why the general public looks at lax like they look at squash and crew: Rich white person sport.

hmmm, I dunno about the "moving" part, but the sport has definitely expanded to many wealthier enclaves around the country. (Northeast prep schools have long been a source of lax players going to say Ivy and NESCAC, not exactly a new phenomenon....and the hubs have only multiplied, not moved).

It's accurate that sports are an entry ticket to higher selectivity schools, and it's also accurate to say that those athletes choosing those paths have a pretty darn strong success record on average post college.

But the numbers of such players, from all over the country, has expanded significantly more than the number of slots at the most selective colleges. So, the difficulty of being one of those few selected for those particular schools has gone up a ton...indeed, you hear bitter grousing from some parents who'd assumed that all the dough they'd poured into Johnny's lax status would pay off, when it doesn't result in that selection. Yes, particularly from some of the areas you mention...that, too, isn't really new...in my era in the '70's alums were grousing when their kids didn't get the nod...competitive standards keep going up...and way, way up now. True for the whole school, not just the athletes.

It was interesting, yesterday, to hear the new AD at my alma mater discuss the importance they are placing on helping their coaches recruit from all over the country, the emphasis on contributing to the college's overall objectives, socio-economic, regional diversity, academic and leadership potentials, etc. As a school that couldn't care less about whether a family can pay the freight, they're interested in increasing the pool of athletes they attract, the best possible recruits across dimensions. That's more the case than not at most of the most selective schools.

It's a different dynamic with schools who need those full freight parents to balance the budget...

It appears to me that the relationship between the sport and the schools has changed dramatically over the past 2 generations. Lacrosse went from something that was essentially a club sport by today's standards (in terms of budgets and school commitment) in the 70's and early 80's, to a marketing tool in the 90's and 00's (promoting a preppy "collegiate" image), to an expensive recruiting tool today. It appears to me that colleges support lacrosse because it attracts a very unique student/future alumni.

- Your average lacrosse player's family can afford full price tuition (including being willing to burn $10k - $60k on a PG year if asked).
- Just as importantly, that same player as a result of family/prep-school/college lacrosse networks is far more likely to turn into an alumni who gives large sums of money to his alma mater.

Colleges today are laser focused on two things: fundraising and brand building. The "Warrior" LaxBro culture of just 15 years ago would never fly today - and I can't imagine the pressure coaches felt during the transition to eliminate that kind of culture from the sport. It undid many hall of fame caliber coaches careers... But to the extent lacrosse programs mind their P's and Q's, check a few boxes on DEI and pop out nice little check-writing alumni - they will continue to get support from administrations.

[MDlaxfan76]

What I am seeing is that at one time LI, Baltimore and a limited Upstate NY were the hubs of youth lax. It’s now moving to Southern CT. Darian, Greenwich, New Canaan and the like. Rich parents see Lax as a way for their child to get into a high academic school. Kid with a 1330 SAT and 95 average has zero chance of going to Harvard or Yale or other high end academic schools. Same kid who rocks it at Lax gets into those same schools.
These parents don’t care about $$$ and the cost of a private school education. They’ve been paying more per year to send their kid to Taft, Salisbury, Deerfield and other NE Prep schools. They are willing to pay for a PG year or a repeat grade to get their kid into these types of high academic schools.
They believe that the school will get their kid a better job and a better life down the road. They are probably correct.
Just look at how the club programs from that area have flourished over the past five years.
Just another reason why the general public looks at lax like they look at squash and crew: Rich white person sport.

hmmm, I dunno about the "moving" part, but the sport has definitely expanded to many wealthier enclaves around the country. (Northeast prep schools have long been a source of lax players going to say Ivy and NESCAC, not exactly a new phenomenon....and the hubs have only multiplied, not moved).

It's accurate that sports are an entry ticket to higher selectivity schools, and it's also accurate to say that those athletes choosing those paths have a pretty darn strong success record on average post college.

But the numbers of such players, from all over the country, has expanded significantly more than the number of slots at the most selective colleges. So, the difficulty of being one of those few selected for those particular schools has gone up a ton...indeed, you hear bitter grousing from some parents who'd assumed that all the dough they'd poured into Johnny's lax status would pay off, when it doesn't result in that selection. Yes, particularly from some of the areas you mention...that, too, isn't really new...in my era in the '70's alums were grousing when their kids didn't get the nod...competitive standards keep going up...and way, way up now. True for the whole school, not just the athletes.

It was interesting, yesterday, to hear the new AD at my alma mater discuss the importance they are placing on helping their coaches recruit from all over the country, the emphasis on contributing to the college's overall objectives, socio-economic, regional diversity, academic and leadership potentials, etc. As a school that couldn't care less about whether a family can pay the freight, they're interested in increasing the pool of athletes they attract, the best possible recruits across dimensions. That's more the case than not at most of the most selective schools.

It's a different dynamic with schools who need those full freight parents to balance the budget...

It appears to me that the relationship between the sport and the schools has changed dramatically over the past 2 generations. Lacrosse went from something that was essentially a club sport by today's standards (in terms of budgets and school commitment) in the 70's and early 80's, to a marketing tool in the 90's and 00's (promoting a preppy "collegiate" image), to an expensive recruiting tool today. It appears to me that colleges support lacrosse because it attracts a very unique student/future alumni.

- Your average lacrosse player's family can afford full price tuition (including being willing to burn $10k - $60k on a PG year if asked).
- Just as importantly, that same player as a result of family/prep-school/college lacrosse networks is far more likely to turn into an alumni who gives large sums of money to his alma mater.

Colleges today are laser focused on two things: fundraising and brand building. The "Warrior" LaxBro culture of just 15 years ago would never fly today - and I can't imagine the pressure coaches felt during the transition to eliminate that kind of culture from the sport. It undid many hall of fame caliber coaches careers... But to the extent lacrosse programs mind their P's and Q's, check a few boxes on DEI and pop out nice little check-writing alumni - they will continue to get support from administrations.

I'm not sure that's as relevant today among the most selective schools with deep endowments, but do you think that applies to ACC and Big 10, as well as the smaller schools? Definitely true of the smaller.

[HooDat]

I'm not sure that's as relevant today among the most selective schools with deep endowments, but do you think that applies to ACC and Big 10, as well as the smaller schools? Definitely true of the smaller.

Those "selective" schools have deep endowments precisely because they are laser focused on raising money and protecting (rather, perhaps, than building) their brand.

If you aren't chasing endowment money as a university president, you will not be the university president for very long. It is their 1st, 2nd and 3rd more important job. Even (especially?) at HYP and Stanford.

[MDlaxfan76]

I'm not sure that's as relevant today among the most selective schools with deep endowments, but do you think that applies to ACC and Big 10, as well as the smaller schools? Definitely true of the smaller.

Those "selective" schools have deep endowments precisely because they are laser focused on raising money and protecting (rather, perhaps, than building) their brand.

If you aren't chasing endowment money as a university president, you will not be the university president for very long. It is their 1st, 2nd and 3rd more important job. Even (especially?) at HYP and Stanford.

I wouldn't argue with the notion that fundraising is a huge part of any college president's job.

I can also attest the top endowed schools have very well oiled efforts at such.

I don't think, however, that most of those are sitting on their laurels, they're quite focused on advancing and expanding their brand, most of which is actually about education.

I was just in a discussion about the Hopkins engineering school's aspirations, and how they want to get there...want to be seen as top 3. MIT, Caltech...Hopkins. I know what kind of innovation is happening in Hanover, definitely not sitting back.

On the other hand, they're all trying to re-think how they could deliver more education for less money...disruption is coming...not sure they have those answers though...

what I meant was about the full pay lax families...do you think ACC and Big Ten look at that?

[Farfromgeneva]

I'm not sure that's as relevant today among the most selective schools with deep endowments, but do you think that applies to ACC and Big 10, as well as the smaller schools? Definitely true of the smaller.

Those "selective" schools have deep endowments precisely because they are laser focused on raising money and protecting (rather, perhaps, than building) their brand.

If you aren't chasing endowment money as a university president, you will not be the university president for very long. It is their 1st, 2nd and 3rd more important job. Even (especially?) at HYP and Stanford.

I’ve got an incongruous story for you on this topic that hits very close to home for me.

[HooDat]

I'm not sure that's as relevant today among the most selective schools with deep endowments, but do you think that applies to ACC and Big 10, as well as the smaller schools? Definitely true of the smaller.

Those "selective" schools have deep endowments precisely because they are laser focused on raising money and protecting (rather, perhaps, than building) their brand.

If you aren't chasing endowment money as a university president, you will not be the university president for very long. It is their 1st, 2nd and 3rd more important job. Even (especially?) at HYP and Stanford.

I’ve got an incongruous story for you on this topic that hits very close to home for me.

what a tease !

[a fan]

I was just in a discussion about the Hopkins engineering school's aspirations, and how they want to get there...want to be seen as top 3. MIT, Caltech...Hopkins. I know what kind of innovation is happening in Hanover, definitely not sitting back.

Easy task when you're pulling $1 Billion per year from the Federal Government for reseach, dwarfing all other Universities on the planet.

All Hop hard sciences should be at the top.

[Farfromgeneva]

I'm not sure that's as relevant today among the most selective schools with deep endowments, but do you think that applies to ACC and Big 10, as well as the smaller schools? Definitely true of the smaller.

Those "selective" schools have deep endowments precisely because they are laser focused on raising money and protecting (rather, perhaps, than building) their brand.

If you aren't chasing endowment money as a university president, you will not be the university president for very long. It is their 1st, 2nd and 3rd more important job. Even (especially?) at HYP and Stanford.

I’ve got an incongruous story for you on this topic that hits very close to home for me.

what a tease !

I mean look at the endowment of the school I support going back to Gearan as president in 1998 to 2015 or so compared against, like, inflation and then see who our president is now. Draw that line.

[blue angels]

it's october 12 and we have the first '25 on the board. fwiw, it looks like he can play.
https://twitter.com/tyxanders/status/15 ... Jv7jA&s=19
and here we are.

He is re-class. Could be the UVA is stacking so many higher stars that he going the PG route to try and get playing time.

the push forward has been part of the discussion here.

He isn’t re-classing to look good against younger kids.

Right.
He already has the commitment, apparently.
If there was transparency about age and other attributes, it might well be obvious as to the logic of taking an extra year before college.
Could be he's relatively young, could be he'd benefit from more advanced academic preparation, who knows...it's a different path than doing a red shirt year, which is the more usual option if a coach simply wants to stockpile a player.

Except Red Shirting cost the school $$$ for the kid’s scholarship. You only get 12.6/year. By PGing school gets a kid a year older without the cost of using scholarship dollars.

As we never went through this with our son nor did any of my other family, I could well be mistaken, but seems to me that the PG year (unless a significant scholarship from the prep school) is quite costly to the family. I don't think (again, no personal experience) that a kid in college needs to be allocated a scholarship if redshirted (though they could get a piece). Spreading out the college payments over 5 years, instead of four, is how much more costly than the straight four? Do you not take an off term or two along the way, get the credits needed but spread out? Do an internship, etc? Is it pretty much a direct tradeoff with the extra prep tuition? (these prep schools get darn expensive!).

I'm definitely not in the know on this...but interested to understand.

Just an example but I know of a 4 Top 100 kid who ended up being asked to PG because there were no spots for him due to COVID. Prep schools across NE wanted him as he was a top 50 player in his class. Basically had five schools bidding against each other for him. Ended up costing his family $10K to attend the prep school which included tuition, room and board. Those schools have a ton of money and if they want you they will do what is necessary to get you.

To clarify, I am assuming his family's share of the tuition was $10,000 and the rest was covered. A top NE boarding school is +/- $60,000 so that is quite a discount on cost.

[oldbartman]

IL recently came out with a list of additional 3 and 4 star players. Seems to be more fodder for the hype cannon imo. What could be an interesting idea for IL is to evaluate how their starred players improve beyond their sophomore years. I don't recall seeing players being re-evaluated after 10th grade. Rarely, if ever, do they put a previously unranked player in the 4 and 5 star category in their junior or senior years. Quite often the incoming top 100 freshmen seems to be a rehash of the top ranked sophomores/incoming juniors from 2 years prior.

[Laxdad2021]

IL recently came out with a list of additional 3 and 4 star players. Seems to be more fodder for the hype cannon imo. What could be an interesting idea for IL is to evaluate how their starred players improve beyond their sophomore years. I don't recall seeing players being re-evaluated after 10th grade. Rarely, if ever, do they put a previously unranked player in the 4 and 5 star category in their junior or senior years. Quite often the incoming top 100 freshmen seems to be a rehash of the top ranked sophomores/incoming juniors from 2 years prior.

That is incorrect. I counted 22 boys in last year’s (2021) class who weren’t top 100 before the final list came out.