Johns Hopkins 2024

[HopFan16]

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.

Not to mention this '25 class is better on paper than the '24s, so if any of this is true, the early returns seem positive? Neither class is as good as the '23s (again, on paper, which doesn't mean much) but that class was greatly enhanced by flipping Chauvette (Yale), Sorichetti (High Point), and Kilrain (Syracuse). So one could argue this class with Nolting, Lamitie, etc. has got off to a better start than that one did.

[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

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.

When were those players recruited? Was there a huge amount of freshmen making an impact beyond Collison. I’ve never said it is going to be a huge drop off but merely something to watch. Milliman recruited at an Ivy. I think he knows how to find academically gifted lacrosse players. That being said don’t assume the program can get the players they used to get both under Petro and PM’s first few years. It isn’t happening anymore.

[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.

When were those players recruited? Was there a huge amount of freshmen making an impact beyond Collison. I’ve never said it is going to be a huge drop off but merely something to watch. Milliman recruited at an Ivy. I think he knows how to find academically gifted lacrosse players. That being said don’t assume the program can get the players they used to get both under Petro and PM’s first few years. It isn’t happening anymore.

I mean, we'll see. I'm just surprised there's so much hand-wringing when 2025 recruiting seems to be going very well. Not to mention very good adds from the portal. Do you really think there has been a significant drop-off in quality from the last decade of Petro's tenure?

[Hoponboard]

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

Stars are mostly for clicks. Get it, Sag.

I’ll take a Degnon any day.

[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

Stars are mostly for clicks. Get it, Sag.

I’ll take a Degnon any day.

Trust me, I get it. The Degnon's are the direction this staff is going as well. They're zigging when others Zag. The high star guys are the players everyone else is chasing after and doling at scholarship money for. But there are lots of diamonds in the rough players out there plus guys like Collison and H. Chauvette that are undervalued. Crawley himself was ranked like #76 or something but he turned out to be a tremendous player. So let UVA, Duke and UNC have those guys, meanwhile base the foundation of the program on players that are underrated and over-motivated. Again, it seems obvious to me that this is a deliberate strategy here that no one seems to want to talk about. Just because an idea conflicts with your worldview or paradigm doesn't mean it's wrong.

[HopFan16]

They're zigging when others Zag.

Zigging when others zag by adding 10 4-stars in this freshman class, three of whom were New Balance All-Americans. Then adding 13 more in the last two classes including the top ranked '24 LSM in '24 and the second highest ranked '25 goalie (beating out Duke). Man they are really zigging hard.

The high star guys are the players everyone else is chasing after and doling at scholarship money for. But there are lots of diamonds in the rough players out there plus guys like Collison and H. Chauvette that are undervalued.

These guys were not undervalued. Every school in the country wanted them. We wouldn't even be having this dumb discussion if IL had just added one extra little star next to Collison's name.

Again, it seems obvious to me that this is a deliberate strategy here that no one seems to want to talk about.

Well then this is pretty embarrassing for you because you're wrong.

The staff was very high on an attackman who happened to be listed as a 5-star on IL in this class and from what I understand they came close to landing him but he decided to go to a rival. That's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes, especially when you haven't been to a Final Four in almost 10 years and the other team has been to several. That's just one anecdote of many. Hell since you are so obsessed with the star system, go to IL right now and tell me which other schools '24 5-stars Spencer Ford and Peter Laake have listed on their profiles under "also considered."

I genuinely think you have to try to be as wrong as you are about so many things so consistently, so I do want to applaud you for that.

[wgdsr]

i dunno about you guys, but i get a good chuckle out of picturing p5 coaches waiting around for an ex-volleyball player to rank up his list... see chauvette fall 2 spots out of the coveted 5 star... and then non-chalantly crossing him off their lists. leaving him to be scooped up by the johns hopkins.

[Sagittarius A*]

Well then this is pretty embarrassing for you because you're wrong.

The staff was very high on an attackman who happened to be listed as a 5-star on IL in this class and from what I understand they came close to landing him but he decided to go to a rival. That's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes, especially when you haven't been to a Final Four in almost 10 years and the other team has been to several. That's just one anecdote of many. Hell since you are so obsessed with the star system, go to IL right now and tell me which other schools '24 5-stars Spencer Ford and Peter Laake have listed on their profiles under "also considered."

I genuinely think you have to try to be as wrong as you are about so many things so consistently, so I do want to applaud you for that.

I would say he went to the rival because they offered more scholarship money. Not saying the staff is averse to 5 stars that fit their criteria, just that they're not willing to pony up for them. You pay a price for everything. Again, according to Lar's comments, these players come with a price.
If I can get two 4 stars for the price of one, that's a better investment.
Again, no 5-stars in three cycles means they're not committed in that direction.

[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..

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

It is a discussion to be had now. Our lax forums can make a true difference to the decisions of Hopkins players making wanting to come here. All the 5-star recruits scan these so I always try to dominate in every single one. I'm very confident I can become a full time Inside Lacrosse analyst if the big guys find my posts. I know almost too much about the creator's game, could've been D1 but I wanted to give some people mercy. JV in high school was a perfect fit for me so I can chain my inner alpha male strength. One time I ripped a lacrosse net like a beast, and it was so sick. Sometimes I'll be at Homewood field chatting with the player's dads and they don't even know who they are talking to. its cute. I like to stay humble haha. #TheRavenOut

[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.

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.

Socio economically and demographically the mens and womens lacrosse teams still look like the Hopkins that I and most of you attended. If Daniels was really applying the full "Ron Daniels admissions treatment" to the lacrosse team, it would probably be club because there's no way you can get the demographics he and Bloomberg have demanded with the makeup of the sport's student athletes. Chris Watson who most of you probably know personally and even played and coached with or against I think was a candidate for the Rhodes Scholarship. It isn't as hard as you think to get competent student athletes who can win.

One of our weaknesses has been the ssdm position. They don't usually hand out 5 stars for those guys and frankly the problems we've had over the last 15 years-speed, athleticism, physicality, mental makeup also don't show up as much in those ratings which tend to focus on stats and flash. How many 4/5 star "crafty attackmen" in Xanders parlance who can't run by anyone and had a billion miaa goals have we had? Or "rangy good sized longpoles" who had 4/5 stars and spent saturdays walking in cement boots trying to cover acc middies or attackmen because they were too slow or couldn't figure out the 2 man game?

[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.

Socio economically and demographically the mens and womens lacrosse teams still look like the Hopkins that I and most of you attended. If Daniels was really applying the full "Ron Daniels admissions treatment" to the lacrosse team, it would probably be club because there's no way you can get the demographics he and Bloomberg have demanded with the makeup of the sport's student athletes. Chris Watson who most of you probably know personally and even played and coached with or against I think was a candidate for the Rhodes Scholarship. It isn't as hard as you think to get competent student athletes who can win.

One of our weaknesses has been the ssdm position. They don't usually hand out 5 stars for those guys and frankly the problems we've had over the last 15 years-speed, athleticism, physicality, mental makeup also don't show up as much in those ratings which tend to focus on stats and flash. How many 4/5 star "crafty attackmen" in Xanders parlance who can't run by anyone and had a billion miaa goals have we had? Or "rangy good sized longpoles" who had 4/5 stars and spent saturdays walking in cement boots trying to cover acc middies or attackmen because they were too slow or couldn't figure out the 2 man game?

i dont know

[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. 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.

Socio economically and demographically the mens and womens lacrosse teams still look like the Hopkins that I and most of you attended. If Daniels was really applying the full "Ron Daniels admissions treatment" to the lacrosse team, it would probably be club because there's no way you can get the demographics he and Bloomberg have demanded with the makeup of the sport's student athletes.

Are you intentionally being absurd? The make up of the current men’s roster is almost 20% Black or Native American. When in the last 100 + years has that ever been the case?

[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.

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.

Socio economically and demographically the mens and womens lacrosse teams still look like the Hopkins that I and most of you attended. If Daniels was really applying the full "Ron Daniels admissions treatment" to the lacrosse team, it would probably be club because there's no way you can get the demographics he and Bloomberg have demanded with the makeup of the sport's student athletes.

Are you intentionally being absurd? The make up of the current men’s roster is almost 20% Black or Native American. When in the last 100 + years has that ever been the case?

That's a different number than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/educatio ... diversity/

[HopFan16]

Socio economically and demographically the mens and womens lacrosse teams still look like the Hopkins that I and most of you attended. If Daniels was really applying the full "Ron Daniels admissions treatment" to the lacrosse team, it would probably be club because there's no way you can get the demographics he and Bloomberg have demanded with the makeup of the sport's student athletes.

Are you intentionally being absurd? The make up of the current men’s roster is almost 20% Black or Native American. When in the last 100 + years has that ever been the case?

I'm getting 13% (8/60), which probably is not far off from other elite teams.

If there is an effort, I doubt it's being imposed by the administration. It's something PM personally believes in doing. And even putting the morality of it aside I think it's probably smart to do so given how much the sport has grown.

[nyjay]

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

DocBarrister

Honest question - is that still actually true? I had kind of assumed that as part of Daniels' "Ivy-facation" of JHU (which has been very successful in achieving its goals (even if I disagree with some of them)) that grade inflation had come to Homewood as well?

[44WeWantMore]

There was a Physics professor whose mission was "to save lives." How? By keeping dummies out of Med School!

Seriously, I cannot believe that our grade inflation has caught up with Harvard.

[jhu06]

There was a Physics professor whose mission was "to save lives." How? By keeping dummies out of Med School!

Seriously, I cannot believe that our grade inflation has caught up with Harvard.

If the Bloomberg $ ever got shut off, the grades would go up and a million other things other schools do to juice the fundraising and happiness of students and alumni that Hopkins doesn't have to do because of mike and uncle sam would change. Like the admissions for athletes.

[51percentcorn]

Socio economically and demographically the mens and womens lacrosse teams still look like the Hopkins that I and most of you attended. If Daniels was really applying the full "Ron Daniels admissions treatment" to the lacrosse team, it would probably be club because there's no way you can get the demographics he and Bloomberg have demanded with the makeup of the sport's student athletes.

Are you intentionally being absurd? The make up of the current men’s roster is almost 20% Black or Native American. When in the last 100 + years has that ever been the case?

I'm getting 13% (8/60), which probably is not far off from other elite teams.

If there is an effort, I doubt it's being imposed by the administration. It's something PM personally believes in doing. And even putting the morality of it aside I think it's probably smart to do so given how much the sport has grown.

It may aso be worth pointing out that while some of the African American players may obviously not be white but they are going to the same schools of the higher economic strata - Ince - McDonogh Brown - Hun/Deerfield Claiborne Western Reserve (day tutition $44K) Menawhile Nicholas Lane - while attending East Lansing High also attended a community college and received a simultaneous associates degree and is majoring in neuroscience so not a dumbell - probably didn;t have to stretch the admissions requirements much for him.

'06 is for once more right than wrong - 87% is WAY WAY more than the overall Hopkins student body. Here are some of the stats from the 2023 class profile:
99% - Top 10% in their class
Average unweighted GPA 3.9
Middle 50th percentile ACT 34-35
Middle 50th SAT 1520-1560
% African American - 16%
%Asian/Hispanic/International - 64%
% Caucasian - 16%
% Native American 2%

If the lacrosse team has to look like the above - turn out the lights the party's over

[51percentcorn]

https://hopkinssports.com/news/2023/10/ ... spire.aspx

If RD and JB are out to destroy lacrosse - funny way of going about it.

[HopFan16]

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... llon/62130

For the fifth time in seven recruiting cycles, Virginia has secured a commitment from the No. 1 player in the class, with the Wahoos continuing their recent hot streak by snagging top-ranked junior Brendan Millon, who announced on Tuesday night.

The McDonogh (Md.) and Team 91 Maryland attackman follows in the footsteps of his older brother McCabe, IL's No. 1 recruit in the Class of 2023, and will play at least two years in Charlottesville with him. Millon chose Virginia after also strongly considering Maryland, Notre Dame and Johns Hopkins.

While many prognosticators long felt that Millon's recruitment would come down to Virginia or Maryland (the in-state power and his mom's alma mater), Brendan was very open during his recruitment. He wasn't always considered a lean to either school until realizing that Charlottesville was where he wanted to spend the next four years. Visits to Notre Dame and Hopkins were eye-opening. However, his familiarity, education, the Wahoos' championship success and their soon-to-be renovated facilities were among the many factors in Millon's decision.

Huh. I feel like Ty wrote that specifically to show how much of an abject moron one of the posters here is