New Programs

[LaxDadMax]

Then gap between D2 and D3 is even greater than the gap between D1 and D2.

This seems like a broad brush. I bet the better D3 girls might have something to say about the gap to D2. Many chose their D3 schools for academic reasons in addition to strong lacrosse programs.

Not true. the top 3 or 4 D3 schools would roll any D2 team. Agree there are some basically very weak no-cut teams at the bottom of D3, but this blanket statement isn't right.

Your statement of "the top 3 or 4 D3 schools would ROLL ANY D2 team", is really over the top. Do you watch much D2 Lacrosse or follow it? What are the top 5 programs in D2? I have experience at that level and I can tell you that your statement is wrong. There are very strong programs and players at that D2 level I can assure you. Go watch a game between High Level D2 programs and I think you might want to make some adjustments to your statement.

I've seen Middlebury and Tufts play and I've seen Tampa and Florida Southern play.

Middlebury and Tufts are just on a different level. Now I think the top D2 teams could probably beat the bottom 40% of D1. But the top few D3 schools are just recruiting from a different talent pool.

[MolonLaxe]

Ok perfect example today. Stetson. STETSON beat Gardner Webb 23-3. STETSON! At the risk of upsetting some parents, Darien high school can beat Gardner Webb. That’s not a knock on the girls that play there. Not every team should be allowed to have a D1 team if they can’t compete. There should be some type of criteria. No doubt not one of those girls had a good time getting trashed today.

Well one offers scholarships and one doesn't. Stetson also likely has all different types of funding that GW doesn't.

Should the game have been rescheduled? No. But adding more programs, even at low levels, means that GW could play an Austin Peay or Furman instead of a Stetson or Coastal Carolina.

Not sure how this is different than Louisiana Lafayette destroys Houston Baptist in a majority of sports. Adding teams should theoretically reduce these blowouts.

No doubt it's no fun getting trashed every game. Nonetheless, one season or even several in a row don't define a school or team. I was interested to see that Howard's women's lax team, which has won 2 games in about 8 years, had a relatively strong 10-3 season in 2013 and wins in the years before and after against other solid teams, Davidson, Bryant, High Point etc. Some of those teams may have been new during those years, and maybe that speaks to someone's point about new, mid-tier or low-tier teams creating essentially their own pool to play against.

A question...how do you or others know which teams have funding/scholarships and which do not?

HBCU’s are a different beast—I wouldn’t categorize them the same way as other schools.


The forum on Facebook is a good source for funding, as are the club’s directors, etc. There is no shame in asking a coach on a visit, since you’ll find some schools just don’t have support for some sports—Furman was a great example of this which was covered on other threads here.

Thanks for the info. What forum on Facebook?

The group is: "Recruiting Discussion: Parent-to-Parent Women’s College Lacrosse" and it has some pretty good info.

[Bart]

Then gap between D2 and D3 is even greater than the gap between D1 and D2.

This seems like a broad brush. I bet the better D3 girls might have something to say about the gap to D2. Many chose their D3 schools for academic reasons in addition to strong lacrosse programs.

Not true. the top 3 or 4 D3 schools would roll any D2 team. Agree there are some basically very weak no-cut teams at the bottom of D3, but this blanket statement isn't right.

Your statement of "the top 3 or 4 D3 schools would ROLL ANY D2 team", is really over the top. Do you watch much D2 Lacrosse or follow it? What are the top 5 programs in D2? I have experience at that level and I can tell you that your statement is wrong. There are very strong programs and players at that D2 level I can assure you. Go watch a game between High Level D2 programs and I think you might want to make some adjustments to your statement.

I've seen Middlebury and Tufts play and I've seen Tampa and Florida Southern play.

Middlebury and Tufts are just on a different level. Now I think the top D2 teams could probably beat the bottom 40% of D1. But the top few D3 schools are just recruiting from a different talent pool.

I disagree, especially with the term roll any D2 team. When I read ROLL I am thinking beating a team by 10+ goals? I just do not see that.

I watch a fair amount of D2 as well D3 teams like Middlebury, Tufts, Wm Smith from time to time, in fact I watched Wm Smith just last week and nothing I saw would suggest that they would roll any of the top D2 teams. Certainly very talented but I see the same level of talent at the top of D2. Would the top D3 beat the top D2, probably but the reciprocal would also be true. It certainly would depend on the year. This is just grist for the mill as these teams will never play each other.

[cltlax]

Then gap between D2 and D3 is even greater than the gap between D1 and D2.

This seems like a broad brush. I bet the better D3 girls might have something to say about the gap to D2. Many chose their D3 schools for academic reasons in addition to strong lacrosse programs.

Not true. the top 3 or 4 D3 schools would roll any D2 team. Agree there are some basically very weak no-cut teams at the bottom of D3, but this blanket statement isn't right.

Your statement of "the top 3 or 4 D3 schools would ROLL ANY D2 team", is really over the top. Do you watch much D2 Lacrosse or follow it? What are the top 5 programs in D2? I have experience at that level and I can tell you that your statement is wrong. There are very strong programs and players at that D2 level I can assure you. Go watch a game between High Level D2 programs and I think you might want to make some adjustments to your statement.

I've seen Middlebury and Tufts play and I've seen Tampa and Florida Southern play.

Middlebury and Tufts are just on a different level. Now I think the top D2 teams could probably beat the bottom 40% of D1. But the top few D3 schools are just recruiting from a different talent pool.

Would the top D3 beat the top D2, probably but the reciprocal would also be true. It certainly would depend on the year. This is just grist for the mill as these teams will never play each other.

Yep. Which does not support a view that there is a huge gap between D2 and D3 players.

[Bart]

Then gap between D2 and D3 is even greater than the gap between D1 and D2.

This seems like a broad brush. I bet the better D3 girls might have something to say about the gap to D2. Many chose their D3 schools for academic reasons in addition to strong lacrosse programs.

Not true. the top 3 or 4 D3 schools would roll any D2 team. Agree there are some basically very weak no-cut teams at the bottom of D3, but this blanket statement isn't right.

Your statement of "the top 3 or 4 D3 schools would ROLL ANY D2 team", is really over the top. Do you watch much D2 Lacrosse or follow it? What are the top 5 programs in D2? I have experience at that level and I can tell you that your statement is wrong. There are very strong programs and players at that D2 level I can assure you. Go watch a game between High Level D2 programs and I think you might want to make some adjustments to your statement.

I've seen Middlebury and Tufts play and I've seen Tampa and Florida Southern play.

Middlebury and Tufts are just on a different level. Now I think the top D2 teams could probably beat the bottom 40% of D1. But the top few D3 schools are just recruiting from a different talent pool.

Would the top D3 beat the top D2, probably but the reciprocal would also be true. It certainly would depend on the year. This is just grist for the mill as these teams will never play each other.

Yep. Which does not support a view that there is a huge gap between D2 and D3 players.

I agee. At the top end they are very similar.

[ertrader]

The reason we have 140 D1 Women's team is to meet Title IX requirements to keep up with men's participation in the bigger sports. The 75 on the guys side? Don't care.

How many D1 Women's Soccer teams are there? 347.

We haven't even hit peak lacrosse numbers to match soccer yet.

There are many teams at all different levels and opportunities to play are out there.

If Austin Peay results in more teams in the TN area starting up programs, I'll welcome it.

I know it’s about Title 9. Think you guys are missing what I’m saying. But we’ve had this conversation multiple times on this board. The people who are interested in growing the sport, which is crazy because it is the fastest growing girls sport, will always say more is better. Even if it means putting 25 kids on a team in Alaska who can’t catch and loses every game 100-0.

The sport can still grow in Tennessee with D3 teams. Let them crawl then walk then run. Why sprint right in. Now keep in mind. I never heard of the school. If it’s a top d1 program especially sports, of course it’s going to be easier.

I know I’m on the minority side in this. I just don’t see the good think about certain teams like Howard or Central Ct getting shut out every year. Appreciate the respectful discourse though.

I have been in the other camp, but think you are winning me over. I keep hearing people say this is the fastest growing sport but think that is when you look at like 10-15 years ago and compare to today. This may make you feel worse. Would it surprise you if there are less girls who played lacrosse in HS in 22/23 year (98,014) than in 18/19 (99,750)? HS girls are the pipeline to college and flat numbers don't support the fast growing store. Some attribute the decline to Covid rebound but seems like a long time to still be talking about HS sports rebounding from Covid? I understand this does not address that the talent level could be increasing throughout youth programs, but the pure growth in numbers at HS level hasn’t been there recently.

Date – National Federation of State HS Association
https://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-co ... y-archive/

Just as a counterpoint to this, the actual number of High Schools offering girls lacrosse went from 2,877 in 18/19 to 3,164 in 22/23, a 10% increase. It seems the average roster size shrunk from about 35 to 30 for who knows what reason.

[laxfan9999]

It is interesting that Earley has not been nearly as effective as people expected going to Denver this year. Is this because Middlebury was so much better than most teams they played with crazy depth?

[610Lax]

The reason we have 140 D1 Women's team is to meet Title IX requirements to keep up with men's participation in the bigger sports. The 75 on the guys side? Don't care.

How many D1 Women's Soccer teams are there? 347.

We haven't even hit peak lacrosse numbers to match soccer yet.

There are many teams at all different levels and opportunities to play are out there.

If Austin Peay results in more teams in the TN area starting up programs, I'll welcome it.

I know it’s about Title 9. Think you guys are missing what I’m saying. But we’ve had this conversation multiple times on this board. The people who are interested in growing the sport, which is crazy because it is the fastest growing girls sport, will always say more is better. Even if it means putting 25 kids on a team in Alaska who can’t catch and loses every game 100-0.

The sport can still grow in Tennessee with D3 teams. Let them crawl then walk then run. Why sprint right in. Now keep in mind. I never heard of the school. If it’s a top d1 program especially sports, of course it’s going to be easier.

I know I’m on the minority side in this. I just don’t see the good think about certain teams like Howard or Central Ct getting shut out every year. Appreciate the respectful discourse though.

I have been in the other camp, but think you are winning me over. I keep hearing people say this is the fastest growing sport but think that is when you look at like 10-15 years ago and compare to today. This may make you feel worse. Would it surprise you if there are less girls who played lacrosse in HS in 22/23 year (98,014) than in 18/19 (99,750)? HS girls are the pipeline to college and flat numbers don't support the fast growing store. Some attribute the decline to Covid rebound but seems like a long time to still be talking about HS sports rebounding from Covid? I understand this does not address that the talent level could be increasing throughout youth programs, but the pure growth in numbers at HS level hasn’t been there recently.

Date – National Federation of State HS Association
https://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-co ... y-archive/

Unfortunately, the effects of Covid will still be impacting lax participation numbers at the high school level for a few more years. I am the director for a rec league girls lacrosse program. In 2019 we had 165 players registered from grades 1-8. The whole league was cancelled in 2020 and 2021. In 2022 we had 60 girls register, 2023 we had 86 and in 2024 we are up to 110. 2024 is the first year we had enough girls register(16) to field a 7/8 team since 2019, when we had two full teams of 21 girls. Similar trends were seen in our area basketball programs as well for those grades.

Covid’s impact on the youth levels of sports was greater than many realize unless you are involved in those programs. Kids are starting to come back, parental fear is subsiding but the high school participation numbers won’t rise to the pre-Covid levels until this years freshman class graduates.

[NutmegCrunch]

The sport can still grow in Tennessee with D3 teams. Let them crawl then walk then run. Why sprint right in. Now keep in mind. I never heard of the school. If it’s a top d1 program especially sports, of course it’s going to be easier.

I know I’m on the minority side in this. I just don’t see the good think about certain teams like Howard or Central Ct getting shut out every year. Appreciate the respectful discourse though.

That's a fair point - but schools can't pick and choose which of their sports are D1, D2, or D3. It's not like CCSU, as a D1 school, can say, "Our lacrosse team hasn't won a game in forever, so we're going to drop them down to D3 so they don't get slaughtered." If it's a D1 school, ALL of their teams need to compete in D1. D3 and D2 schools are allowed to classify one men's and one women's sport as D1, if they were grandfathered in; Johns Hopkins is in this category for both men's and women's lacrosse. Also, if the NCAA doesn't sponsor a championship in that sport in that division, a D2 or D3 school can compete in D1 - this obviously does not apply to women's lacrosse.

Having an acquaintance and a friend-of-a-friend whose kids play for CCSU - both committed with full knowledge of the team's record. It may be surprising to some, but there were factors in the decision-making process that were more important to those girls than the competitiveness of the lacrosse team.

[laxdadpat]

I looked over the DII and DIII top 20 rankings. I have always felt the top D3 schools are clearly better than the top D2 in the non-revenue sports. This applies to the girls from my area that have committed to play lacrosse in college from my perspective. The D3 schools seem to get the much better players, I don't see much talent going D2 from my area. There are exceptions to every rule, but I see girls choosing "ehhhhh" (technical term) D2 colleges to play lacrosse that should be making their choice based on the quality of the education. If they really loved playing, they would have gotten good enough to have real D1 or D3 options(harsh statement). I am the first to say that I do not watch any D2 lacrosse and very few D3 games. Mayby I would change my mind if I watched a Wingate vs Rollins game, but I doubt it.

[WLaxdad]

The reason we have 140 D1 Women's team is to meet Title IX requirements to keep up with men's participation in the bigger sports. The 75 on the guys side? Don't care.

How many D1 Women's Soccer teams are there? 347.

We haven't even hit peak lacrosse numbers to match soccer yet.

There are many teams at all different levels and opportunities to play are out there.

If Austin Peay results in more teams in the TN area starting up programs, I'll welcome it.

I know it’s about Title 9. Think you guys are missing what I’m saying. But we’ve had this conversation multiple times on this board. The people who are interested in growing the sport, which is crazy because it is the fastest growing girls sport, will always say more is better. Even if it means putting 25 kids on a team in Alaska who can’t catch and loses every game 100-0.

The sport can still grow in Tennessee with D3 teams. Let them crawl then walk then run. Why sprint right in. Now keep in mind. I never heard of the school. If it’s a top d1 program especially sports, of course it’s going to be easier.

I know I’m on the minority side in this. I just don’t see the good think about certain teams like Howard or Central Ct getting shut out every year. Appreciate the respectful discourse though.

I have been in the other camp, but think you are winning me over. I keep hearing people say this is the fastest growing sport but think that is when you look at like 10-15 years ago and compare to today. This may make you feel worse. Would it surprise you if there are less girls who played lacrosse in HS in 22/23 year (98,014) than in 18/19 (99,750)? HS girls are the pipeline to college and flat numbers don't support the fast growing store. Some attribute the decline to Covid rebound but seems like a long time to still be talking about HS sports rebounding from Covid? I understand this does not address that the talent level could be increasing throughout youth programs, but the pure growth in numbers at HS level hasn’t been there recently.

Date – National Federation of State HS Association
https://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-co ... y-archive/

Unfortunately, the effects of Covid will still be impacting lax participation numbers at the high school level for a few more years. I am the director for a rec league girls lacrosse program. In 2019 we had 165 players registered from grades 1-8. The whole league was cancelled in 2020 and 2021. In 2022 we had 60 girls register, 2023 we had 86 and in 2024 we are up to 110. 2024 is the first year we had enough girls register(16) to field a 7/8 team since 2019, when we had two full teams of 21 girls. Similar trends were seen in our area basketball programs as well for those grades.

Covid’s impact on the youth levels of sports was greater than many realize unless you are involved in those programs. Kids are starting to come back, parental fear is subsiding but the high school participation numbers won’t rise to the pre-Covid levels until this years freshman class graduates.

Wow this is surprising! We live in a dense suburban area and our rec program which feeds 1 HS can field 2 sometimes 3 teams per age division which is 2 grades worth of girls. The competition to get a spot in HS is pretty fierce. I think our school being so big is a factor, other schools in the area it's probably not the same.

[LaxDadMax]

It is interesting that Earley has not been nearly as effective as people expected going to Denver this year. Is this because Middlebury was so much better than most teams they played with crazy depth?

Yes with the exception of the top 3 or 4 NESCAC teams, most games were pretty big mismatches

[Bart]

It is interesting that Earley has not been nearly as effective as people expected going to Denver this year. Is this because Middlebury was so much better than most teams they played with crazy depth?

I guess I wonder who expected more than she’s given? In her move from D3 to D1 she’s done a pretty good job IMHO.

She’s started every game.
In a season so far that Denver has faced 4 ranked opponents she has scored in every game but 1 in an offense that’s recent history is not high scoring. That’s a pretty solid contribution.

[610Lax]

Unfortunately, the effects of Covid will still be impacting lax participation numbers at the high school level for a few more years. I am the director for a rec league girls lacrosse program. In 2019 we had 165 players registered from grades 1-8. The whole league was cancelled in 2020 and 2021. In 2022 we had 60 girls register, 2023 we had 86 and in 2024 we are up to 110. 2024 is the first year we had enough girls register(16) to field a 7/8 team since 2019, when we had two full teams of 21 girls. Similar trends were seen in our area basketball programs as well for those grades.

Covid’s impact on the youth levels of sports was greater than many realize unless you are involved in those programs. Kids are starting to come back, parental fear is subsiding but the high school participation numbers won’t rise to the pre-Covid levels until this years freshman class graduates.

Wow this is surprising! We live in a dense suburban area and our rec program which feeds 1 HS can field 2 sometimes 3 teams per age division which is 2 grades worth of girls. The competition to get a spot in HS is pretty fierce. I think our school being so big is a factor, other schools in the area it's probably not the same.

Our overall league covers a major cities suburbs. Now there are some school district feeder programs which haven’t been impacted but they are mostly the districts that consistently have the top HS programs in the state. The overall leagues numbers are down significantly from 2019. Good news is they’re coming back!

When sports were taken away for ‘20- 21, kids found other things to do. The top players kept playing but the kids that didn’t play club and that it wasn’t super important to moved on after not playing for two years.

[lax410]

Then gap between D2 and D3 is even greater than the gap between D1 and D2.

This seems like a broad brush. I bet the better D3 girls might have something to say about the gap to D2. Many chose their D3 schools for academic reasons in addition to strong lacrosse programs.

Not true. the top 3 or 4 D3 schools would roll any D2 team. Agree there are some basically very weak no-cut teams at the bottom of D3, but this blanket statement isn't right.

Your statement of "the top 3 or 4 D3 schools would ROLL ANY D2 team", is really over the top. Do you watch much D2 Lacrosse or follow it? What are the top 5 programs in D2? I have experience at that level and I can tell you that your statement is wrong. There are very strong programs and players at that D2 level I can assure you. Go watch a game between High Level D2 programs and I think you might want to make some adjustments to your statement.

I've seen Middlebury and Tufts play and I've seen Tampa and Florida Southern play.

Middlebury and Tufts are just on a different level. Now I think the top D2 teams could probably beat the bottom 40% of D1. But the top few D3 schools are just recruiting from a different talent pool.

Would the top D3 beat the top D2, probably but the reciprocal would also be true. It certainly would depend on the year. This is just grist for the mill as these teams will never play each other.

Yep. Which does not support a view that there is a huge gap between D2 and D3 players.

I agee. At the top end they are very similar.

Also, the girls these schools are attracting is vastly different. It would be pretty unusual for a player to have Middlebury or Pace or West Chester as their top choices. Academically they’re just not at all similar.

[lax410]

It is interesting that Earley has not been nearly as effective as people expected going to Denver this year. Is this because Middlebury was so much better than most teams they played with crazy depth?

I guess I wonder who expected more than she’s given? In her move from D3 to D1 she’s done a pretty good job IMHO.

She’s started every game.
In a season so far that Denver has faced 4 ranked opponents she has scored in every game but 1 in an offense that’s recent history is not high scoring. That’s a pretty solid contribution.

100%. Going from D3 to a starter on a top 10 D1 program is a big success to me.

[laxfan9999]

I guess I just had higher expectations for a two time D3 player and attacker of the year. I expected more than just a goal a game from a starter. I am sure Denver was anticipating something like Rhatigan jumping from Mercer to Northwestern.

[Bart]

I guess I just had higher expectations for a two time D3 player and attacker of the year. I expected more than just a goal a game from a starter. I am sure Denver was anticipating something like Rhatigan jumping from Mercer to Northwestern.

But you’re comparing apples to oranges here. Rhatigan jumped into a lineup that had the Tewy winner in it as well as another Tewy nominated attacker. Ms. Early doesn’t have that type of support.

[ultravisitor]

I guess I just had higher expectations for a two time D3 player and attacker of the year. I expected more than just a goal a game from a starter. I am sure Denver was anticipating something like Rhatigan jumping from Mercer to Northwestern.

I'm not sure that's fair or reasonable, as Hailey Rhatigan scored 93 goals playing division 1 lacrosse her last season before transferring to Northwestern.

[Brownlax]

The reason we have 140 D1 Women's team is to meet Title IX requirements to keep up with men's participation in the bigger sports. The 75 on the guys side? Don't care.

How many D1 Women's Soccer teams are there? 347.

We haven't even hit peak lacrosse numbers to match soccer yet.

There are many teams at all different levels and opportunities to play are out there.

If Austin Peay results in more teams in the TN area starting up programs, I'll welcome it.

I know it’s about Title 9. Think you guys are missing what I’m saying. But we’ve had this conversation multiple times on this board. The people who are interested in growing the sport, which is crazy because it is the fastest growing girls sport, will always say more is better. Even if it means putting 25 kids on a team in Alaska who can’t catch and loses every game 100-0.

The sport can still grow in Tennessee with D3 teams. Let them crawl then walk then run. Why sprint right in. Now keep in mind. I never heard of the school. If it’s a top d1 program especially sports, of course it’s going to be easier.

I know I’m on the minority side in this. I just don’t see the good think about certain teams like Howard or Central Ct getting shut out every year. Appreciate the respectful discourse though.

I have been in the other camp, but think you are winning me over. I keep hearing people say this is the fastest growing sport but think that is when you look at like 10-15 years ago and compare to today. This may make you feel worse. Would it surprise you if there are less girls who played lacrosse in HS in 22/23 year (98,014) than in 18/19 (99,750)? HS girls are the pipeline to college and flat numbers don't support the fast growing store. Some attribute the decline to Covid rebound but seems like a long time to still be talking about HS sports rebounding from Covid? I understand this does not address that the talent level could be increasing throughout youth programs, but the pure growth in numbers at HS level hasn’t been there recently.

Date – National Federation of State HS Association
https://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-co ... y-archive/

Unfortunately, the effects of Covid will still be impacting lax participation numbers at the high school level for a few more years. I am the director for a rec league girls lacrosse program. In 2019 we had 165 players registered from grades 1-8. The whole league was cancelled in 2020 and 2021. In 2022 we had 60 girls register, 2023 we had 86 and in 2024 we are up to 110. 2024 is the first year we had enough girls register(16) to field a 7/8 team since 2019, when we had two full teams of 21 girls. Similar trends were seen in our area basketball programs as well for those grades.

Covid’s impact on the youth levels of sports was greater than many realize unless you are involved in those programs. Kids are starting to come back, parental fear is subsiding but the high school participation numbers won’t rise to the pre-Covid levels until this years freshman class graduates.

Wow this is surprising! We live in a dense suburban area and our rec program which feeds 1 HS can field 2 sometimes 3 teams per age division which is 2 grades worth of girls. The competition to get a spot in HS is pretty fierce. I think our school being so big is a factor, other schools in the area it's probably not the same.

In our area, a big difference in the rec participation has been indirectly attributable to the coaching and the leadership at that level. I have seen some programs that had incredible participation starting with the K-2 clinic level fall dramatically after top coaches, who had kids in that program or who were just volunteering their time - age out or leave. Parents all talk to each other and when they hear kids are having a great experience that draws more kids and of course the opposite is true. Just my 2 cents for what it is worth.