Johns Hopkins 2024

[flalax22]

These kids are rising juniors - haven't taken SATs or ACTs yet - Of the 19 Five stars on ILS list looks like maybe only 3/4/5 are from public schools - rest are from the McDonoghs/Haverfords etc. of the world. Maher and Ortleib noted as being outstanding students. Certainly glad PM and JC are so good at predicting admission decisions - oh by the way - no details or evidence that standards have been raised for the lacrosse team. I was told - during the Daniels/Alanna tenure - by an incredibly well respected and tenured Hopkins DIII sport head coach that standards were raised across the board for DIII athletes - and lacrosse was not affected.

When they tightened up the standards for the D3 teams lacrosse was not affected and this has been recent, as in the last year. Circle back to your well respected tenured Coach if they are still there. They will know

[coda]

Its just a silly idea. Every program wants the best players. Not all players view Hopkins the way people in this chat do. Some kids prefer a larger school. They may want more of a college town. Maybe another program is higher rated in their major of choice. Hopkins is all about the tradition. Problem is recruits have not grown up watching great Hopkins programs. It not as easy as just offering some money.. By the way, people I have talked to think Hopkins is one of the most aggressive teams in NIL currently. No way to know the truth about that, but seems to fly in the face of this thesis.

[MDlaxfan76]

Its just a silly idea. Every program wants the best players. Not all players view Hopkins the way people in this chat do. Some kids prefer a larger school. They may want more of a college town. Hopkins is all about the tradition. Problem is recruits have not grown up watching great Hopkins programs. It not as easy as just offering some money.. By the way, people I have talked to think Hopkins is one of the most aggressive teams in NIL currently. No way to know the truth about that, but seems to fly in the face of this thesis.

My understanding re NIL is that you are correct...akin to Syracuse.

[HopFan16]

On a separate note what's going on with this Raven guy? That post was basically what would happen if someone fed several of the preceding posts through ChatGPT. Either spam or an extremely weird and elaborate bit. Normally wouldn't care but that enormous block of text almost made my phone self-combust.

[jhu06]

This staff doesn't seem to be interested in recruiting five stars, or isn't willing to pay the price for them.
Of course, a team is more than the sum of its parts.
The previous staff got their share of five stars, but it didn't exactly work out for them except for one year, 2015.
If you get a class of players that fit well together and work well together you potentially can get a superior product in the end.
2023 was a pleasant surprise, but the team was often playing as an underdog in the big games.
I wonder how this team will respond to higher expectations in 2024 and having a big target on their backs.

Tightening academic requirements around the program requires the staff to find players that can get by admissions not the ones deemed star worthy. It will be an interesting storyline to follow for the program in the next few years.

If you've paid any attention to what Daniels has said and done in reshaping admissions at Hopkins over the last 10 years you know what utter bs it is to suggest that the lacrosse teams are held to any tougher standards academic or other wise. It's a not a political statement to note the differences between the composition of the undergraduate student body and the mens and womens lacrosse teams and the agenda Daniels has laid forth for what he wants the rest of the students to look like. If the same Daniels admissions standards were applied to the lacrosse program they'd be d3 recruiting a different way.

IL did a podcast series of programs and recruiting, I would imagine that Hopkins was one on their list. Matter of if they did it and how good the questions were covering many of you said over the weekend and have for years here.

On the topic of the captains, one of the questions into next spring is where the improvement actually comes from with so many veterans on the team. Usually improvement comes from guys moving from their first year to expanded second or third year roles, not guys going into their 3rd and 4th or even 5th years as D1 guys. How do you get more out of same and how do guys who will be difference makers in 2025/26 develop while further down the depth chart?

[51percentcorn]

When they tightened up the standards for the D3 teams lacrosse was not affected and this has been recent, as in the last year. Circle back to your well respected tenured Coach if they are still there. They will know

So by that theory this gaggle of 4 stars Hopkins has recruited in the last 3 cycles means 4 stars study more than 5 stars?

[flalax22]

This staff doesn't seem to be interested in recruiting five stars, or isn't willing to pay the price for them.
Of course, a team is more than the sum of its parts.
The previous staff got their share of five stars, but it didn't exactly work out for them except for one year, 2015.
If you get a class of players that fit well together and work well together you potentially can get a superior product in the end.
2023 was a pleasant surprise, but the team was often playing as an underdog in the big games.
I wonder how this team will respond to higher expectations in 2024 and having a big target on their backs.

Tightening academic requirements around the program requires the staff to find players that can get by admissions not the ones deemed star worthy. It will be an interesting storyline to follow for the program in the next few years.

If you've paid any attention to what Daniels has said and done in reshaping admissions at Hopkins over the last 10 years you know what utter bs it is to suggest that the lacrosse teams are held to any tougher standards academic or other wise. It's a not a political statement to note the differences between the composition of the undergraduate student body and the mens and womens lacrosse teams and the agenda Daniels has laid forth for what he wants the rest of the students to look like. If the same Daniels admissions standards were applied to the lacrosse program they'd be d3 recruiting a different way.

IL did a podcast series of programs and recruiting, I would imagine that Hopkins was one on their list. Matter of if they did it and how good the questions were covering many of you said over the weekend and have for years here.

On the topic of the captains, one of the questions into next spring is where the improvement actually comes from with so many veterans on the team. Usually improvement comes from guys moving from their first year to expanded second or third year roles, not guys going into their 3rd and 4th or even 5th years as D1 guys. How do you get more out of same and how do guys who will be difference makers in 2025/26 develop while further down the depth chart?

Never ceases to amaze me how uniformed you are. Hopkins lacrosse is not getting the same profile of recruit into school now that they were even two years ago. It’s changed. We haven’t seen the impact yet on the field but we are in the recruiting classes.

[jhu06]

This staff doesn't seem to be interested in recruiting five stars, or isn't willing to pay the price for them.
Of course, a team is more than the sum of its parts.
The previous staff got their share of five stars, but it didn't exactly work out for them except for one year, 2015.
If you get a class of players that fit well together and work well together you potentially can get a superior product in the end.
2023 was a pleasant surprise, but the team was often playing as an underdog in the big games.
I wonder how this team will respond to higher expectations in 2024 and having a big target on their backs.

Tightening academic requirements around the program requires the staff to find players that can get by admissions not the ones deemed star worthy. It will be an interesting storyline to follow for the program in the next few years.

If you've paid any attention to what Daniels has said and done in reshaping admissions at Hopkins over the last 10 years you know what utter bs it is to suggest that the lacrosse teams are held to any tougher standards academic or other wise. It's a not a political statement to note the differences between the composition of the undergraduate student body and the mens and womens lacrosse teams and the agenda Daniels has laid forth for what he wants the rest of the students to look like. If the same Daniels admissions standards were applied to the lacrosse program they'd be d3 recruiting a different way.

IL did a podcast series of programs and recruiting, I would imagine that Hopkins was one on their list. Matter of if they did it and how good the questions were covering many of you said over the weekend and have for years here.

On the topic of the captains, one of the questions into next spring is where the improvement actually comes from with so many veterans on the team. Usually improvement comes from guys moving from their first year to expanded second or third year roles, not guys going into their 3rd and 4th or even 5th years as D1 guys. How do you get more out of same and how do guys who will be difference makers in 2025/26 develop while further down the depth chart?

Never ceases to amaze me how uniformed you are. Hopkins lacrosse is not getting the same profile of recruit into school now that they were even two years ago. It’s changed. We haven’t seen the impact yet on the field but we are in the recruiting classes.

Explain.

[TheRaven]

This staff doesn't seem to be interested in recruiting five stars, or isn't willing to pay the price for them.
Of course, a team is more than the sum of its parts.
The previous staff got their share of five stars, but it didn't exactly work out for them except for one year, 2015.
If you get a class of players that fit well together and work well together you potentially can get a superior product in the end.
2023 was a pleasant surprise, but the team was often playing as an underdog in the big games.
I wonder how this team will respond to higher expectations in 2024 and having a big target on their backs.

Tightening academic requirements around the program requires the staff to find players that can get by admissions not the ones deemed star worthy. It will be an interesting storyline to follow for the program in the next few years.

If you've paid any attention to what Daniels has said and done in reshaping admissions at Hopkins over the last 10 years you know what utter bs it is to suggest that the lacrosse teams are held to any tougher standards academic or other wise. It's a not a political statement to note the differences between the composition of the undergraduate student body and the mens and womens lacrosse teams and the agenda Daniels has laid forth for what he wants the rest of the students to look like. If the same Daniels admissions standards were applied to the lacrosse program they'd be d3 recruiting a different way.

IL did a podcast series of programs and recruiting, I would imagine that Hopkins was one on their list. Matter of if they did it and how good the questions were covering many of you said over the weekend and have for years here.

On the topic of the captains, one of the questions into next spring is where the improvement actually comes from with so many veterans on the team. Usually improvement comes from guys moving from their first year to expanded second or third year roles, not guys going into their 3rd and 4th or even 5th years as D1 guys. How do you get more out of same and how do guys who will be difference makers in 2025/26 develop while further down the depth chart?

Never ceases to amaze me how uniformed you are. Hopkins lacrosse is not getting the same profile of recruit into school now that they were even two years ago. It’s changed. We haven’t seen the impact yet on the field but we are in the recruiting classes.

If one takes the time to delve into the extensive archives of Daniels’ influence over the admissions landscape at Hopkins spanning the past decade, a disconcerting and even ludicrous reality emerges. It becomes patently absurd to even entertain the notion that the lacrosse teams, whether men’s or women’s, are held to any semblance of stringent academic or other criteria. This isn’t a mere casual observation but a stark, undeniable truth. The juxtaposition between the composition of the undergraduate student body and that of the lacrosse teams serves as a mirror reflecting Daniels’ deliberate agenda for molding the remainder of the student populace into a likeness he deems acceptable. To contemplate the application of these exacting admissions standards to the lacrosse program is to peer into a grim abyss. Such a move would thrust them mercilessly into the unforgiving depths of Division III, a place far removed from their current status. This would necessitate a complete overhaul of their recruiting strategies, an upheaval of monumental proportions. Enter Inside Lacrosse, the authoritative voice in the lacrosse community, which recently embarked on a podcast series scrutinizing the inner workings of various programs and their recruiting methodologies. It is reasonable to assume that Hopkins, with its storied lacrosse tradition, would be a prominent subject of interest in this exposé. The critical question that lingers in the collective consciousness is whether this investigation effectively dissected and addressed the glaring issues that have ruffled feathers for an extended period. Shifting our focus to the impending spring season, a pressing conundrum emerges amidst a backdrop of seasoned veterans dominating the team’s roster. Conventionally, one would anticipate improvement stemming from the organic progression of players transitioning from their maiden year into more substantial roles during their second or third years. Yet, the enigma deepens when confronted with individuals entering their third, fourth, or even fifth year as Division I athletes. The challenge at hand is deciphering the methodology to extract heightened performance from a familiar cast, and equally puzzling is the path of development for those earmarked to be game-changers in the distant future of 2025/26, lurking further down the labyrinthine depth chart.

[MDlaxfan76]

If there's been a radical change in the past two years, it would be a huge surprise.

And some folks who I know (and who would know) would be up in arms...and I'm not hearing that.

That said, it might be fair to say that there could be fewer "basketweaving" options than in eras gone by , so recruits should expect to actually work to do well or even just to make it through, but I don't think recruits who should be interested in Hopkins cuts out many of the top players based on admissibility.

I do think the grumbling about the "rest of" the student body is misplaced, though it's a refrain those of us who chose Ivy have to put up with decade after decade. Sure, there are numerous super smart, not athletically inclined, students on campus who may be less "social" than others, but there are also lots of students playing sports or otherwise socially active as well. Same as Ivies. If it really bothers you to be in class with hyper bright, hard working fellow students, I suggest you're missing the point of going to a top-notch university. We can all learn from one another if we open ourselves to it.

But that's my soapbox.
BTW, I recommend for incoming athletes, or any other students looking towards business and entrepreneurship rather than academia, to look up the Center For Leadership Education, which is interdisciplinary though housed within the Whiting School of Engineering.

https://engineering.jhu.edu/cle/

[MDlaxfan76]

On a separate note what's going on with this Raven guy? That post was basically what would happen if someone fed several of the preceding posts through ChatGPT. Either spam or an extremely weird and elaborate bit. Normally wouldn't care but that enormous block of text almost made my phone self-combust.

Strange sense of humor?

[Sagittarius A*]

So, hypothetically, if it costs .5 ride to get a five star and .25 of a full ride to get a four star, then I can get two four stars for the price of one five star.
I don't know what the actual numbers are here, I'm just leveraging Lar's comments that you're not getting top players for nothing. If I get the five star, and if he gets injured, like has happened over and over and over again at Hopkins in the last decade, then he never reaches his potential.
If I get two four stars, there's a decent chance one of them blossoms into a 5 start (ie Collison) and it gets me two for the price of one and gives me some protection against injury.
Anyway, you get the idea.
Again, if this staff has not recruited even one five star in three years it's because they are not making the effort to do so relative to other schools. That may change in the future, but for now it seems like an active choice on their part. I'm not trying to justify but only to advance plausible hypotheses as to why this may be the case.

[HopFan16]

If I get two four stars, there's a decent chance one of them blossoms into a 5 start (ie Collison) and it gets me two for the price of one and gives me some protection against injury.
Anyway, you get the idea.

Lol jesus christ somebody help you. They didn't recruit Collison because he was a 4-star who they hoped would "blossom into a 5-star." They recruited him because they thought he was one of the best players in the class and guess what? HE IS. Stop fixating on the stars. The staff creates the list of kids they plan to recruit long before IL even releases their star ratings.

Again, if this staff has not recruited even one five star in three years it's because they are not making the effort to do so relative to other schools. That may change in the future, but for now it seems like an active choice on their part. I'm not trying to justify but only to advance plausible hypotheses as to why this may be the case.

Lobotomy

[Sagittarius A*]

If I get two four stars, there's a decent chance one of them blossoms into a 5 start (ie Collison) and it gets me two for the price of one and gives me some protection against injury.
Anyway, you get the idea.

Lol jesus christ somebody help you. They didn't recruit Collison because he was a 4-star who they hoped would "blossom into a 5-star." They recruited him because they thought he was one of the best players in the class and guess what? HE IS. Stop fixating on the stars. The staff creates the list of kids they plan to recruit long before IL even releases their star ratings.

Again, if this staff has not recruited even one five star in three years it's because they are not making the effort to do so relative to other schools. That may change in the future, but for now it seems like an active choice on their part. I'm not trying to justify but only to advance plausible hypotheses as to why this may be the case.

Lobotomy

Did that work out for you?

[flalax22]

This staff doesn't seem to be interested in recruiting five stars, or isn't willing to pay the price for them.
Of course, a team is more than the sum of its parts.
The previous staff got their share of five stars, but it didn't exactly work out for them except for one year, 2015.
If you get a class of players that fit well together and work well together you potentially can get a superior product in the end.
2023 was a pleasant surprise, but the team was often playing as an underdog in the big games.
I wonder how this team will respond to higher expectations in 2024 and having a big target on their backs.

Tightening academic requirements around the program requires the staff to find players that can get by admissions not the ones deemed star worthy. It will be an interesting storyline to follow for the program in the next few years.

If you've paid any attention to what Daniels has said and done in reshaping admissions at Hopkins over the last 10 years you know what utter bs it is to suggest that the lacrosse teams are held to any tougher standards academic or other wise. It's a not a political statement to note the differences between the composition of the undergraduate student body and the mens and womens lacrosse teams and the agenda Daniels has laid forth for what he wants the rest of the students to look like. If the same Daniels admissions standards were applied to the lacrosse program they'd be d3 recruiting a different way.

IL did a podcast series of programs and recruiting, I would imagine that Hopkins was one on their list. Matter of if they did it and how good the questions were covering many of you said over the weekend and have for years here.

On the topic of the captains, one of the questions into next spring is where the improvement actually comes from with so many veterans on the team. Usually improvement comes from guys moving from their first year to expanded second or third year roles, not guys going into their 3rd and 4th or even 5th years as D1 guys. How do you get more out of same and how do guys who will be difference makers in 2025/26 develop while further down the depth chart?

Never ceases to amaze me how uniformed you are. Hopkins lacrosse is not getting the same profile of recruit into school now that they were even two years ago. It’s changed. We haven’t seen the impact yet on the field but we are in the recruiting classes.

If one takes the time to delve into the extensive archives of Daniels’ influence over the admissions landscape at Hopkins spanning the past decade, a disconcerting and even ludicrous reality emerges. It becomes patently absurd to even entertain the notion that the lacrosse teams, whether men’s or women’s, are held to any semblance of stringent academic or other criteria..

Try reading the posts. Of course they weren’t held to the same standards in the last decade or more. What I am saying is they are much tighter now and closer to the average Hopkins admitted student than they ever have been and that’s a dramatic change that has been enacted very recently. It’s too early to tell how it will impact the on field product but it WILL be a discussion in the coming years

[DocBarrister]

If there's been a radical change in the past two years, it would be a huge surprise.

And some folks who I know (and who would know) would be up in arms...and I'm not hearing that.

That said, it might be fair to say that there could be fewer "basketweaving" options than in eras gone by , so recruits should expect to actually work to do well or even just to make it through, but I don't think recruits who should be interested in Hopkins cuts out many of the top players based on admissibility.

I do think the grumbling about the "rest of" the student body is misplaced, though it's a refrain those of us who chose Ivy have to put up with decade after decade. Sure, there are numerous super smart, not athletically inclined, students on campus who may be less "social" than others, but there are also lots of students playing sports or otherwise socially active as well. Same as Ivies. If it really bothers you to be in class with hyper bright, hard working fellow students, I suggest you're missing the point of going to a top-notch university. We can all learn from one another if we open ourselves to it.

But that's my soapbox.
BTW, I recommend for incoming athletes, or any other students looking towards business and entrepreneurship rather than academia, to look up the Center For Leadership Education, which is interdisciplinary though housed within the Whiting School of Engineering.

https://engineering.jhu.edu/cle/

Please … at Hopkins, even “basketweaving” is a hard class.

DocBarrister

[51percentcorn]

So something doesn't compute here - you are RD and you are not sending Christmas cards to your men's lacrosse head coach particularly after 2013. You increase standards across the board for athletes in or around 2016ish and you exempt lacrosse. Then you finally dismiss your athletic nemesis wait two years of disastrous results and then implement something for the lacrosse teams completely under the radar?? Does it not seem logical that the most justifiable way to do this would have been to do it with all sports back when you did it for the D3 teams with the added benefit of incredibly pi$$ing off the guy you supposedly dislike? AND it might cause him to leave and you might not have to pay him because back then he would have been hired as a HC somewhere??? SO now you do it and handcuff the newer guy? For what? The 10-15 kids you bring in - who need to want to put up with Hopkins academics to begin with - and to MD's point Sex & Money and the Weather class don't exist anymore - are not going to move your US News needle in either direction (I guess you have to double that number with the women's team). I think the usual suspects thought of as the lacrosse alumni with deeper pockets would be apopletic.

Plus - obviously there are still several "starred players" on the board - BUT Hopkins is currently third in total Inside Lacrosse stars for 2025 should you care about such things - which you shouldn't. You need talent - the more the better but these rankings are silly. Notre Dame has 48 stars - Michigan has 42 stars and Hopkins has 41.

[MDlaxfan76]

If there's been a radical change in the past two years, it would be a huge surprise.

And some folks who I know (and who would know) would be up in arms...and I'm not hearing that.

That said, it might be fair to say that there could be fewer "basketweaving" options than in eras gone by , so recruits should expect to actually work to do well or even just to make it through, but I don't think recruits who should be interested in Hopkins cuts out many of the top players based on admissibility.

I do think the grumbling about the "rest of" the student body is misplaced, though it's a refrain those of us who chose Ivy have to put up with decade after decade. Sure, there are numerous super smart, not athletically inclined, students on campus who may be less "social" than others, but there are also lots of students playing sports or otherwise socially active as well. Same as Ivies. If it really bothers you to be in class with hyper bright, hard working fellow students, I suggest you're missing the point of going to a top-notch university. We can all learn from one another if we open ourselves to it.

But that's my soapbox.
BTW, I recommend for incoming athletes, or any other students looking towards business and entrepreneurship rather than academia, to look up the Center For Leadership Education, which is interdisciplinary though housed within the Whiting School of Engineering.

https://engineering.jhu.edu/cle/

Please … at Hopkins, even “basketweaving” is a hard class.

DocBarrister

I never mastered it, much less PhD...

[MDlaxfan76]

So something doesn't compute here - you are RD and you are not sending Christmas cards to your men's lacrosse head coach particularly after 2013. You increase standards across the board for athletes in or around 2016ish and you exempt lacrosse. Then you finally dismiss your athletic nemesis wait two years of disastrous results and then implement something for the lacrosse teams completely under the radar?? Does it not seem logical that the most justifiable way to do this would have been to do it with all sports back when you did it for the D3 teams with the added benefit of incredibly pi$$ing off the guy you supposedly dislike? AND it might cause him to leave and you might not have to pay him because back then he would have been hired as a HC somewhere??? SO now you do it and handcuff the newer guy? For what? The 10-15 kids you bring in - who need to want to put up with Hopkins academics to begin with - and to MD's point Sex & Money and the Weather class don't exist anymore - are not going to move your US News needle in either direction (I guess you have to double that number with the women's team). I think the usual suspects thought of as the lacrosse alumni with deeper pockets would be apopletic.

Plus - obviously there are still several "starred players" on the board - BUT Hopkins is currently third in total Inside Lacrosse stars for 2025 should you care about such things - which you shouldn't. You need talent - the more the better but these rankings are silly. Notre Dame has 48 stars - Michigan has 42 stars and Hopkins has 41.

We had "Rocks for Jocks", surely available most everywhere?..."Oceans" was a favorite class as was "Earth, Wind, and Fire" taught by Robert Jastrow...look him up...gotta say, these classes are among those most often called upon later in life...

[primitiveskills]

This staff doesn't seem to be interested in recruiting five stars, or isn't willing to pay the price for them.
Of course, a team is more than the sum of its parts.
The previous staff got their share of five stars, but it didn't exactly work out for them except for one year, 2015.
If you get a class of players that fit well together and work well together you potentially can get a superior product in the end.
2023 was a pleasant surprise, but the team was often playing as an underdog in the big games.
I wonder how this team will respond to higher expectations in 2024 and having a big target on their backs.

Tightening academic requirements around the program requires the staff to find players that can get by admissions not the ones deemed star worthy. It will be an interesting storyline to follow for the program in the next few years.

If you've paid any attention to what Daniels has said and done in reshaping admissions at Hopkins over the last 10 years you know what utter bs it is to suggest that the lacrosse teams are held to any tougher standards academic or other wise. It's a not a political statement to note the differences between the composition of the undergraduate student body and the mens and womens lacrosse teams and the agenda Daniels has laid forth for what he wants the rest of the students to look like. If the same Daniels admissions standards were applied to the lacrosse program they'd be d3 recruiting a different way.

IL did a podcast series of programs and recruiting, I would imagine that Hopkins was one on their list. Matter of if they did it and how good the questions were covering many of you said over the weekend and have for years here.

On the topic of the captains, one of the questions into next spring is where the improvement actually comes from with so many veterans on the team. Usually improvement comes from guys moving from their first year to expanded second or third year roles, not guys going into their 3rd and 4th or even 5th years as D1 guys. How do you get more out of same and how do guys who will be difference makers in 2025/26 develop while further down the depth chart?

Never ceases to amaze me how uniformed you are. Hopkins lacrosse is not getting the same profile of recruit into school now that they were even two years ago. It’s changed. We haven’t seen the impact yet on the field but we are in the recruiting classes.

If one takes the time to delve into the extensive archives of Daniels’ influence over the admissions landscape at Hopkins spanning the past decade, a disconcerting and even ludicrous reality emerges. It becomes patently absurd to even entertain the notion that the lacrosse teams, whether men’s or women’s, are held to any semblance of stringent academic or other criteria..

Try reading the posts. Of course they weren’t held to the same standards in the last decade or more. What I am saying is they are much tighter now and closer to the average Hopkins admitted student than they ever have been and that’s a dramatic change that has been enacted very recently. It’s too early to tell how it will impact the on field product but it WILL be a discussion in the coming years

The "on field product" was pretty good last year, no? With significant contributions from Milliman's recruits/ transfers. Your point about recruting different student athletes than before might be true (not sure), but seems odd to be concerned about performance when all indicators are positive for now.