D3 Roster Size

[River Donkey]

What is the coaching willing to do in terms of travel. How many fit on a bus? Do you take everyone or do you have a travel roster? Over 50 is hard to manage for one team but 40 or less is really light especially if you have a couple of k juries and now all of a sudden. You have 36.

I would expand the number of goalies and fogos you need simply to be able to practice because they have to go to school as well and sometimes class happens during their practice time slot.

Some teams are taking multiple busses. But the cost for 50 plus players to travel on an overnight isn’t something all teams can afford.

[River Donkey]

Institutions and coaches should have as many guys on their roster as they would like, even if it is 60 plus. If the last 10 guys never see the field, continue to help out with the team GPA and mom and dad are happy being the team parents for most of their son's career, so be it.

That being said, to field a competitive roster you should have at least 30 guys.

Everyone gets a trophy?? I’m sorry but this is NCAA lax not club and roster spots should be awarded on merit, playing ability/grades etc. Not Mom and Dad’s wealth. I thought we were trying to make this game more inclusive, but I see the opposite. I see the privileged be given better opportunities because of their social status.

[River Donkey]

This topic is not a one size fits all. In other words, what is appropriate for a perennial top 25 D3 program is not anywhere near the same considerations for roster size of a mid level program which in turn, is not the same considerations of a further lower level program. A top 25 program has the luxury of taking a hard pass on a player the coach knows won’t “ever see the field”. Top 25 program coaches are recruiting players they believe will see the field, and therefore are probably guaranteeing (at least some of them) a helmet for their 1st year - that is the extent of any guarantee- thereafter they will need to earn it each year. If the kid has any self belief, he’ll accept that offer and bet on himself. If he’s scared away by competition, coach won’t want him anyway. The next level kid for the top 25 program, is a “reverse inquiry” type, where no promise of even making the team is made. They become one of probably 70+ kids that show up for fall ball. And Coach will have a look to see if there are any diamonds in the rough that went un-recruited.

In the end, imo 45-50 is the ideal number of players. Fewer, and you don’t have the competitive practices necessary for growth. More, and you run the risk of having to go to a travel squad for away games and that can be very hard on team moral.

Lower level teams are lucky if they have the luxury of having 50+ players in fall ball to even consider. Even lower level teams are lucky to get 30 guys that can adequately throw and catch. And if a program has fewer than 20 players, they should consider dropping the sport. I know they won’t, but THEY SHOULD, if they truly cared about player safety.

Nail on the head Ned!! Excellent insight.

[River Donkey]

Good points Nosey Ned especially about the minimum size of a roster that should be allowed. My son has played teams that have very small rosters. Durning the game a few get injured and by the time it's over they are down to 3 or 4 subs. The final score of these games are like 20 to 0 and could have easily been 50 to 0. These games make no sense to even play. It is a safety issue in my opinion. Perhaps there should be an NCAA D4 division where all the teams that are like this can be a part of. Or they just move their program to club level. I know this is not a "grow the game" perspective but it does need to be looked into.

[River Donkey]

Since we're on a D3 board discussing roster sizes, I feel it begs the question - Who in D3 had the largest roster?

Without much digging and just off the top of my head based on prior searches I'm going to throw out my top 3 that I've found

Stevenson - 62
Trine - 56
RIT - 55

Wow! Stevenson is down on numbers, hope coach cantabene isn’t in jeopardy. Lol!!

[Leonard Washington]

Everyone gets a trophy?? I’m sorry but this is NCAA lax not club and roster spots should be awarded on merit, playing ability/grades etc. Not Mom and Dad’s wealth. I thought we were trying to make this game more inclusive, but I see the opposite. I see the privileged be given better opportunities because of their social status.

Not what I said and not the point I was trying to make. Not even close.

[Leonard Washington]

JV lacrosse teams have gone away because a lot of kids were insulted when asked to play a JV game and with NCAA cap on games played, any JV game a player takes part in, the coach would have to sit him out for a varsity game potentially putting the team in a bad spot and short players for varsity game.

I'm surprised that (the cap issue, not the feeling insulted) is the reason and that those games count towards an NCAA cap. If I remember right, at least in the NESCAC, JV teams played a mix of each other, community colleges and scrimmages vs prep schools. I imagine only the ones vs other NCAA member JVs would count, and it should be easy enough to categorize them as scrimmages to avoid the cap.

Yes, there are a specific number of games you can play in as a player to go along with the number of contests that can be played each year (having them being called scrimmages, at the DIII level are a whole different set of issues, hence why they have to be called contests). Where it gets tricky is with compliance and having a "JV player" play both NCAA "Varsity" games as well as their JV games (even though they are supposed to be two different rosters; crossover does happen) hence why some of those JV players do not suit up/travel for away games in DIII, they don't have a JV team at all or they have a limited number of games the head coach schedules.

A number of years ago, Ithaca and SLU both played Tampa's JV team on their spring breaks and neither listed them as games on their schedule. Tampa did though because they had an official "JV team".

[River Donkey]

Yes prep school, juco, other JV’s all count as games played. I think it’s crazy too.

[SixBySix]

I don't see a huge amount of value in having more D3 lacrosse teams for the sake of having more D3 lacrosse teams. Regional expansion, absolutely. I had never heard of the game until 7th grade and the nearest NCAA team (at any level) was a few hundred miles away when I graduated. But I don't think the sport is losing anything by not having Cazenovia playing next year, and has been mentioned, there are plenty of places for players to find a roster spot if their only consideration is being on an NCAA lacrosse team.

[JPAtlantic]

Food for thought: many NESCACs don't use lacrosse to put heads in beds and several of those programs were reasonably competitive in 2023 with rosters around 45 - Williams (41), Amherst (46), Midd (46).

Maybe they dont use them to put big #s of heads in beds, but they certainly do to put FULL PAY heads in beds, even if only 40-45 instead of 55+ elsewhere.

Most kids with less than a 4.0 will gladly pay to get into a NESCAC school with acceptance rates of 15% or lower even if it means sitting on the bench for 4 years. Acceptance to an elite school without elite grades is the pay-off for this sport.

[InsiderRoll]

Food for thought: many NESCACs don't use lacrosse to put heads in beds and several of those programs were reasonably competitive in 2023 with rosters around 45 - Williams (41), Amherst (46), Midd (46).

Maybe they dont use them to put big #s of heads in beds, but they certainly do to put FULL PAY heads in beds, even if only 40-45 instead of 55+ elsewhere.

Most kids with less than a 4.0 will gladly pay to get into a NESCAC school with acceptance rates of 15% or lower even if it means sitting on the bench for 4 years. Acceptance to an elite school without elite grades is the pay-off for this sport.

I don’t know about Middlebury, but both Amherst and Williams are need blind in admissions. Meaning their policy is that they cannot look at a family’s ability to pay in their admissions process. Their endowments can cover every single family’s demonstrated need. So searching for full pay families is not a priority for those two institutions. I’d imagine Middlebury isn’t too far off the mark either.

Schools like trinity and Conn are the exact opposite. Their staffs must find full pay families.

[AOD]

I don’t know about Middlebury, but both Amherst and Williams are need blind in admissions. Meaning their policy is that they cannot look at a family’s ability to pay in their admissions process. Their endowments can cover every single family’s demonstrated need. So searching for full pay families is not a priority for those two institutions. I’d imagine Middlebury isn’t too far off the mark either.

While that is true as an admissions policy, just look at the high schools and prep schools that sent the current roster of players to Amherst, for example. The coach isn't taking too may fliers with that crew. When you're recruiting from Choate or Lawrenceville or Taft or Haverford, you know what you're getting.

[InsiderRoll]

I don’t know about Middlebury, but both Amherst and Williams are need blind in admissions. Meaning their policy is that they cannot look at a family’s ability to pay in their admissions process. Their endowments can cover every single family’s demonstrated need. So searching for full pay families is not a priority for those two institutions. I’d imagine Middlebury isn’t too far off the mark either.

While that is true as an admissions policy, just look at the high schools and prep schools that sent the current roster of players to Amherst, for example. The coach isn't taking too may fliers with that crew. When you're recruiting from Choate or Lawrenceville or Taft or Haverford, you know what you're getting.

Yes. Well obviously the best high schools in America are going come with a price tag. They are going to generate the highest volume of admissible students.

The discussion of access to an elite level education at young age for those without a great deal of means is obviously a very charged debate and not really one that’s going to be solved here. But it is a very real issue.

[AOD]

I don’t know about Middlebury, but both Amherst and Williams are need blind in admissions. Meaning their policy is that they cannot look at a family’s ability to pay in their admissions process. Their endowments can cover every single family’s demonstrated need. So searching for full pay families is not a priority for those two institutions. I’d imagine Middlebury isn’t too far off the mark either.

While that is true as an admissions policy, just look at the high schools and prep schools that sent the current roster of players to Amherst, for example. The coach isn't taking too may fliers with that crew. When you're recruiting from Choate or Lawrenceville or Taft or Haverford, you know what you're getting.

Yes. Well obviously the best high schools in America are going come with a price tag. They are going to generate the highest volume of admissible students.

The discussion of access to an elite level education at young age for those without a great deal of means is obviously a very charged debate and not really one that’s going to be solved here. But it is a very real issue.

I don't disagree. FWIW, 5 NESCACs are need blind (add Midd, Hamilton and Bowdoin to your list). The remaining schools, perhaps somewhat surprisingly, are need aware at admissions.