Recruiting

[LaxDadMax]

Now that bulk of top players have committed, lets look at some winners and losers. Teams like UNC, Maryland, Florida, BC, Notre Dame,Stanford, etc have already been discussed at length. Wanna focus on some teams that i think did well who haven't been talked about.

Winners

Navy: They do a great job recruiting every year. Lots of solid, really good athletic girls who have a never ending motor. No different this year. Kaitlyn Hill is a nice attacker from Maryland.

Florida State: This is a really good class for a first time program. Not too far off from Clemson's very first recruiting class, which was pretty impressive. They got one of the best goalies in the class in Hadley Booth. Also landed a couple of players from the talent rich YJ Manning and NXT club programs and Olivia DeSimone, who was a defensive stalwart for a really good Sayville team in 2024

Denver: A great program that no one really talks about. Has quietly stacked good recruiting classes back to back to back. And it shows in their on field performance. 2026 class doesn't have the quantity but it has quality, seems like they were more selective. Meredith Estepp is a rangy athletic middie who will thrive in Denver's system.

UVA: I like what this program is doing and where they are going. For the longest time we wondered why UVA wasn't better and constantly under performed for a school of it's stature and resources. Sonia LaMonica was a fantastic hire. She has breathed new life into the program and recruits are taking notice. Pulled a great coup landing the packaged deal of the Findora sisters. Regan Backer is a top 25 in this class and that was a great get as well. They had a strong class last year too. That plus the strong play on the field last year, i think this program is on the rise.

Dartmouth: They are wiping the floor with everyone in the ivies in terms of recruiting. Only Ivy school to land a top 25 player in back to back years and they landed 3 top 50 players in 2026.

Michigan: Landed a top tier attacker in Julie Shaughnessy and another top 25 middie in Abbie Rattay. They needed more offense and they got it. They've already shown a lot of growth as a program and i expect that to continue

Losers

Virginia Tech: seems like they are stuck in a cycle of mediocrity. All their good players transfer out after 2 or 3 years. and they are not recruiting at a level to adequately replace them.

Ohio State: Low expectations to begin with but 2 total commitments for the 2026 class? that's horrible. What's the reason? They have no excuse to not be competing with Michigan for recruits and talent coming out of Colorado and the midwest.

Louisville: if you're an ACC team and your recruiting class is on par with Kennesaw State, Liberty, and UAlbany, you're in trouble

Agree with Louisville and VT. Those two programs will battle it out with Pitt for the bottom of the ACC. Their recruiting classes to date are not knocking anyone’s socks off. I’m not surprised Louisville struggles to attract talent, but am surprised that VT doesn’t recruit better.

VT lost a lot of experience in the transfer portal this year. That team had a lot of turmoil last season, which led to the exodus. Skiera lost the locker room and the program is not progressing. They lack speed and the athletes to compete in the ACC. I would not be surprised to see them finish last in the ACC this season.

My daughter's friend who played at Louisville did not have great things to say about her experience. I don’t know all of the details but know safety was a concern. This was one person’s experience but it was enough for us to scratch them off the list.

I don’t see either program making great strides. Teeter seems entrenched at Louisville but Skiera may be on shaky ground. With LaMonica elevating UVA in her first year and with Klaes consistently having Top 20 teams at JMU I don’t see how VT doesn’t make a change if they finish at the bottom of the ACC.

My 25 daughter said Teeter had "serious creeper vibes"

kind of new to the women's threads, but is this a typical post on here?

Agree that was a strange post. Teeter has coached for many years. Haven’t heard anything related to his suitability to interacting with his players. Would be much more interested in what an alum or parent of a former player would say than what a 16 year old girl supposedly said to her dad.

Never meant to imply that he wasn't suitable to interact with 16-23 years olds. I shared that my daughter (and many of her teammates) thought he was "different", something which has been posted on this board by several folks.

Clearly he is an acquired taste, which may not suit all. My point is that in these recruiting showcases, his mannerisms may not always attract top talents, compared to other more gregarious recruiters in the ACC like Olin, Barnes, and Williams

[wgdsr]

Now that bulk of top players have committed, lets look at some winners and losers. Teams like UNC, Maryland, Florida, BC, Notre Dame,Stanford, etc have already been discussed at length. Wanna focus on some teams that i think did well who haven't been talked about.

Winners

Navy: They do a great job recruiting every year. Lots of solid, really good athletic girls who have a never ending motor. No different this year. Kaitlyn Hill is a nice attacker from Maryland.

Florida State: This is a really good class for a first time program. Not too far off from Clemson's very first recruiting class, which was pretty impressive. They got one of the best goalies in the class in Hadley Booth. Also landed a couple of players from the talent rich YJ Manning and NXT club programs and Olivia DeSimone, who was a defensive stalwart for a really good Sayville team in 2024

Denver: A great program that no one really talks about. Has quietly stacked good recruiting classes back to back to back. And it shows in their on field performance. 2026 class doesn't have the quantity but it has quality, seems like they were more selective. Meredith Estepp is a rangy athletic middie who will thrive in Denver's system.

UVA: I like what this program is doing and where they are going. For the longest time we wondered why UVA wasn't better and constantly under performed for a school of it's stature and resources. Sonia LaMonica was a fantastic hire. She has breathed new life into the program and recruits are taking notice. Pulled a great coup landing the packaged deal of the Findora sisters. Regan Backer is a top 25 in this class and that was a great get as well. They had a strong class last year too. That plus the strong play on the field last year, i think this program is on the rise.

Dartmouth: They are wiping the floor with everyone in the ivies in terms of recruiting. Only Ivy school to land a top 25 player in back to back years and they landed 3 top 50 players in 2026.

Michigan: Landed a top tier attacker in Julie Shaughnessy and another top 25 middie in Abbie Rattay. They needed more offense and they got it. They've already shown a lot of growth as a program and i expect that to continue

Losers

Virginia Tech: seems like they are stuck in a cycle of mediocrity. All their good players transfer out after 2 or 3 years. and they are not recruiting at a level to adequately replace them.

Ohio State: Low expectations to begin with but 2 total commitments for the 2026 class? that's horrible. What's the reason? They have no excuse to not be competing with Michigan for recruits and talent coming out of Colorado and the midwest.

Louisville: if you're an ACC team and your recruiting class is on par with Kennesaw State, Liberty, and UAlbany, you're in trouble

Agree with Louisville and VT. Those two programs will battle it out with Pitt for the bottom of the ACC. Their recruiting classes to date are not knocking anyone’s socks off. I’m not surprised Louisville struggles to attract talent, but am surprised that VT doesn’t recruit better.

VT lost a lot of experience in the transfer portal this year. That team had a lot of turmoil last season, which led to the exodus. Skiera lost the locker room and the program is not progressing. They lack speed and the athletes to compete in the ACC. I would not be surprised to see them finish last in the ACC this season.

My daughter's friend who played at Louisville did not have great things to say about her experience. I don’t know all of the details but know safety was a concern. This was one person’s experience but it was enough for us to scratch them off the list.

I don’t see either program making great strides. Teeter seems entrenched at Louisville but Skiera may be on shaky ground. With LaMonica elevating UVA in her first year and with Klaes consistently having Top 20 teams at JMU I don’t see how VT doesn’t make a change if they finish at the bottom of the ACC.

My 25 daughter said Teeter had "serious creeper vibes"

kind of new to the women's threads, but is this a typical post on here?

Agree that was a strange post. Teeter has coached for many years. Haven’t heard anything related to his suitability to interacting with his players. Would be much more interested in what an alum or parent of a former player would say than what a 16 year old girl supposedly said to her dad.

Never meant to imply that he wasn't suitable to interact with 16-23 years olds. I shared that my daughter (and many of her teammates) thought he was "different", something which has been posted on this board by several folks.

Clearly he is an acquired taste, which may not suit all. My point is that in these recruiting showcases, his mannerisms may not always attract top talents, compared to other more gregarious recruiters in the ACC like Olin, Barnes, and Williams

had you said different or an acquired taste, i wouldn't have asked the question.

[MSLAX5]

Besides the top 10 there are some other schools that really going quickly and loading up on 2026's. Filling up quick. At this rate most spots will be filled in before most of the fall tourneys for schools in the top 40. D3 coaches will be active at Presidents cup.

Stonybrook - 13
Fairfield 9
Penn State - 8
Richmond - 8
Dartmouth - 8
Loyola 7
JMU - 7
URI - 6
Albany - 6
Villanova - 6
UMass - 5
UConn - 5

[urgettingwhatuaxed4]

Now that bulk of top players have committed, lets look at some winners and losers. Teams like UNC, Maryland, Florida, BC, Notre Dame,Stanford, etc have already been discussed at length. Wanna focus on some teams that i think did well who haven't been talked about.

Winners

Navy: They do a great job recruiting every year. Lots of solid, really good athletic girls who have a never ending motor. No different this year. Kaitlyn Hill is a nice attacker from Maryland.

Florida State: This is a really good class for a first time program. Not too far off from Clemson's very first recruiting class, which was pretty impressive. They got one of the best goalies in the class in Hadley Booth. Also landed a couple of players from the talent rich YJ Manning and NXT club programs and Olivia DeSimone, who was a defensive stalwart for a really good Sayville team in 2024

Denver: A great program that no one really talks about. Has quietly stacked good recruiting classes back to back to back. And it shows in their on field performance. 2026 class doesn't have the quantity but it has quality, seems like they were more selective. Meredith Estepp is a rangy athletic middie who will thrive in Denver's system.

UVA: I like what this program is doing and where they are going. For the longest time we wondered why UVA wasn't better and constantly under performed for a school of it's stature and resources. Sonia LaMonica was a fantastic hire. She has breathed new life into the program and recruits are taking notice. Pulled a great coup landing the packaged deal of the Findora sisters. Regan Backer is a top 25 in this class and that was a great get as well. They had a strong class last year too. That plus the strong play on the field last year, i think this program is on the rise.

Dartmouth: They are wiping the floor with everyone in the ivies in terms of recruiting. Only Ivy school to land a top 25 player in back to back years and they landed 3 top 50 players in 2026.

Michigan: Landed a top tier attacker in Julie Shaughnessy and another top 25 middie in Abbie Rattay. They needed more offense and they got it. They've already shown a lot of growth as a program and i expect that to continue

Losers

Virginia Tech: seems like they are stuck in a cycle of mediocrity. All their good players transfer out after 2 or 3 years. and they are not recruiting at a level to adequately replace them.

Ohio State: Low expectations to begin with but 2 total commitments for the 2026 class? that's horrible. What's the reason? They have no excuse to not be competing with Michigan for recruits and talent coming out of Colorado and the midwest.

Louisville: if you're an ACC team and your recruiting class is on par with Kennesaw State, Liberty, and UAlbany, you're in trouble

Agree with Louisville and VT. Those two programs will battle it out with Pitt for the bottom of the ACC. Their recruiting classes to date are not knocking anyone’s socks off. I’m not surprised Louisville struggles to attract talent, but am surprised that VT doesn’t recruit better.

VT lost a lot of experience in the transfer portal this year. That team had a lot of turmoil last season, which led to the exodus. Skiera lost the locker room and the program is not progressing. They lack speed and the athletes to compete in the ACC. I would not be surprised to see them finish last in the ACC this season.

My daughter's friend who played at Louisville did not have great things to say about her experience. I don’t know all of the details but know safety was a concern. This was one person’s experience but it was enough for us to scratch them off the list.

I don’t see either program making great strides. Teeter seems entrenched at Louisville but Skiera may be on shaky ground. With LaMonica elevating UVA in her first year and with Klaes consistently having Top 20 teams at JMU I don’t see how VT doesn’t make a change if they finish at the bottom of the ACC.

My 25 daughter said Teeter had "serious creeper vibes"

kind of new to the women's threads, but is this a typical post on here?

Agree that was a strange post. Teeter has coached for many years. Haven’t heard anything related to his suitability to interacting with his players. Would be much more interested in what an alum or parent of a former player would say than what a 16 year old girl supposedly said to her dad.

Never meant to imply that he wasn't suitable to interact with 16-23 years olds. I shared that my daughter (and many of her teammates) thought he was "different", something which has been posted on this board by several folks.

Clearly he is an acquired taste, which may not suit all. My point is that in these recruiting showcases, his mannerisms may not always attract top talents, compared to other more gregarious recruiters in the ACC like Olin, Barnes, and Williams

had you said different or an acquired taste, i wouldn't have asked the question.

My daughter player for him for four years and you can questions his ability to recruit and coach in the ACC all you want but he is never gave her or our our family a "creeper" vibe....at all. That comment is just wrong.

[COlaxdad]

Besides the top 10 there are some other schools that really going quickly and loading up on 2026's. Filling up quick. At this rate most spots will be filled in before most of the fall tourneys for schools in the top 40. D3 coaches will be active at Presidents cup.

Stonybrook - 13
Fairfield 9
Penn State - 8
Richmond - 8
Dartmouth - 8
Loyola 7
JMU - 7
URI - 6
Albany - 6
Villanova - 6
UMass - 5
UConn - 5

Why D3 and not D2? Asking because I've read this on another forum about players that wanted to go D1 probably looking at D3 instead.

[laxmenow]

D2 is great!
D3 is often a fallback for very high academics, girls hoping to play at Ivies might end up at an Amherst or Middlebury for example. D3 is often less of a time commitment as well.
D2 schools give athletic money too

[lax410]

Besides the top 10 there are some other schools that really going quickly and loading up on 2026's. Filling up quick. At this rate most spots will be filled in before most of the fall tourneys for schools in the top 40. D3 coaches will be active at Presidents cup.

Stonybrook - 13
Fairfield 9
Penn State - 8
Richmond - 8
Dartmouth - 8
Loyola 7
JMU - 7
URI - 6
Albany - 6
Villanova - 6
UMass - 5
UConn - 5

Why D3 and not D2? Asking because I've read this on another forum about players that wanted to go D1 probably looking at D3 instead.

D2 and D3 start recruiting in earnest after D1 slows down. Top D2 and D3 schools are pretty different geographically and academically so girls tend to have a preference for school type over division. Obviously $$ is always a consideration.

[MSLAX5]

D2 is great!
D3 is often a fallback for very high academics, girls hoping to play at Ivies might end up at an Amherst or Middlebury for example. D3 is often less of a time commitment as well.
D2 schools give athletic money too

Yes, D2 as well and even some lower D1 waiting for many to slip through. D2 actually are able to contact the earliest soph July1 of soph summer.
D3 NESCACs have to wait to commit until July 1st which is now Aug 1st of Junior year due to academics standards.
Lot's of excellent D3 schools.

[Womenslaxxfan]

D2 is great!
D3 is often a fallback for very high academics, girls hoping to play at Ivies might end up at an Amherst or Middlebury for example. D3 is often less of a time commitment as well.
D2 schools give athletic money too

Yes, D2 as well and even some lower D1 waiting for many to slip through. D2 actually are able to contact the earliest soph July1 of soph summer.
D3 NESCACs have to wait to commit until July 1st which is now Aug 1st of Junior year due to academics standards.
Lot's of excellent D3 schools.

Nescac women’s lacrosse (d3) is an excellent experience. As I’ve mentioned previously, I had one daughter play top 10 division one in the acc, one play top 10 division 3 in the nescac. Both were outstanding experiences and both resulted in my daughters receiving great degrees. The lacrosse is not at the same level from an athleticism and skill standpoint as top 50 division 1, but it’s comparable to the bottom 60 percent of d1.

There’s no athletic scholarship money—but most nescac lacrosse families that we met were thrilled with the experience that their daughters enjoyed.

[Dadlax121]

An admittedly naive question.

If a 2026 player is now committed to a very large state school, which seems to be all in on women’s lacrosse- will fund the maximum allowed and now is currently fully funded- does the current scholarship amount she committed to (35% for example) even matter? I think if the world goes the way some suggest, rosters will be smaller but all girls will be full scholarships. Or do I have this wrong?

[spidey44]

An admittedly naive question.

If a 2026 player is now committed to a very large state school, which seems to be all in on women’s lacrosse- will fund the maximum allowed and now is currently fully funded- does the current scholarship amount she committed to (35% for example) even matter? I think if the world goes the way some suggest, rosters will be smaller but all girls will be full scholarships. Or do I have this wrong?

The Power 4 schools will have to participate in revenue sharing - TBD on how that works out between football and the rest of the sports. Those schools will also be required to abide by the roster limits. They also have the ability to give full scholarships to each player on the roster, HOWEVER, they do not have to. They can decide how much or how little they give to each athlete and it could be different from sport to sport.

[MSLAX5]

An admittedly naive question.

If a 2026 player is now committed to a very large state school, which seems to be all in on women’s lacrosse- will fund the maximum allowed and now is currently fully funded- does the current scholarship amount she committed to (35% for example) even matter? I think if the world goes the way some suggest, rosters will be smaller but all girls will be full scholarships. Or do I have this wrong?

This is the best article I have found and sheds some light on the reality of the situations.
https://www.usalacrosse.com/magazine/co ... e-lacrosse

[Relax77]

An admittedly naive question.

If a 2026 player is now committed to a very large state school, which seems to be all in on women’s lacrosse- will fund the maximum allowed and now is currently fully funded- does the current scholarship amount she committed to (35% for example) even matter? I think if the world goes the way some suggest, rosters will be smaller but all girls will be full scholarships. Or do I have this wrong?

If they opt in there is a cap on rosters. But most schools are not going to give 38 full scholarships. Plus there is talk about how it works. If Penn State gives an additional 20 football scholarships, that means there has to be 20 scholarships across all women’s sports. So no. They aren’t giving 38 scholarships to Penn State relax. They may give 2. Another two to soccer. Another two to gymnastics, etc etc. It’s school specific as well. USF seems to be giving everyone and the kid who works in McDonald’s full rides.

[Laximus]

An admittedly naive question.

If a 2026 player is now committed to a very large state school, which seems to be all in on women’s lacrosse- will fund the maximum allowed and now is currently fully funded- does the current scholarship amount she committed to (35% for example) even matter? I think if the world goes the way some suggest, rosters will be smaller but all girls will be full scholarships. Or do I have this wrong?

IMHO....Many schools already carry less than the proposed 38 already so smaller roster will be dependent on each school. As for the scholarships, it is my understanding that most schools will certainly increase their football scholarships from the current 85 to the proposed 105. Basketball already gives 14 so there is not alot to pick up there to the proposed 15. In turn due to Title 9, schools will increase womens scolarships by the same number of increased male scholarships. What sports and how many scholoarships to any given womens sports is anyones guess. I do not think many if any will increase to 38 full scholarship across the board especially when you consider more than half the girls on a D1 WLAX roster will rarely see meaningful or any minutes at all. In short, at the end of the day these athletic programs are businesses that just got hit with a huge additional variable cost. I am not aware of many businesses that pay the same wages to the receptionist as they do the CEO. As I mentioned in previous post, I think the WLAX scholarship generally speaking ends up in the 18-22 range for well funded schools which covers the 14-16 girls that play and the other top few underclassmen they are developing. It is entirely possible that some of the bigger schools may drop a mens sport or 2 to help close the gap.

[Trey]

Didn’t feel my daughter got enough exposure this summer. Does anyone know any good showcase this fall? Thank you.

[Relax77]

Didn’t feel my daughter got enough exposure this summer. Does anyone know any good showcase this fall? Thank you.

Not knowing what club she is from or her level this is some advice I would give. If she’s a 26, talk with her club director. Find out where they believe she is at this point and hit up a few fall prospect days at colleges she would like to attend. This late in the game you can’t overreach for d1 so hopefully her director will be honest. There’s only 600 girls in d1 which means there’s still over 1100 spots available. D2 and d3 practically didnt even start yet. I assume since your here, you believe you’re daughter can play D1, so I think individual colleges would be a good way to go. Before Sept 1 you can take a shotgun approach, after October it should be more precision. Also have her readjust her list and email the colleges again to let them know her interest and if you have video. Good luck. Stressful time for these kids, but it’s just the 1st period. 2 more to go. (Former hockey player. )

[Trey]

Thank you so much!!

[LaxDadMax]

An admittedly naive question.

If a 2026 player is now committed to a very large state school, which seems to be all in on women’s lacrosse- will fund the maximum allowed and now is currently fully funded- does the current scholarship amount she committed to (35% for example) even matter? I think if the world goes the way some suggest, rosters will be smaller but all girls will be full scholarships. Or do I have this wrong?

From everything i've heard, even the most well-funded programs will won't be near 38 scholarships. At the high end, I've heard UNC is targeting 24 and Clemson a few more than that.

Regardless, 95% of all scholarships are year to year renewalable. Ultimately, schools will pay what they need to maintain/retain talent within their given budgets

[LaxDadMax]

Didn’t feel my daughter got enough exposure this summer. Does anyone know any good showcase this fall? Thank you.

If she is a 26, then she shouldn't be going anywhere without talking to coaches first. At this point, you need to be very focused and only targeting schools where 1) there may be room on the roster and 2) they have expressed some interest.

[wgdsr]

An admittedly naive question.

If a 2026 player is now committed to a very large state school, which seems to be all in on women’s lacrosse- will fund the maximum allowed and now is currently fully funded- does the current scholarship amount she committed to (35% for example) even matter? I think if the world goes the way some suggest, rosters will be smaller but all girls will be full scholarships. Or do I have this wrong?

IMHO....Many schools already carry less than the proposed 38 already so smaller roster will be dependent on each school. As for the scholarships, it is my understanding that most schools will certainly increase their football scholarships from the current 85 to the proposed 105. Basketball already gives 14 so there is not alot to pick up there to the proposed 15. In turn due to Title 9, schools will increase womens scolarships by the same number of increased male scholarships. What sports and how many scholoarships to any given womens sports is anyones guess. I do not think many if any will increase to 38 full scholarship across the board especially when you consider more than half the girls on a D1 WLAX roster will rarely see meaningful or any minutes at all. In short, at the end of the day these athletic programs are businesses that just got hit with a huge additional variable cost. I am not aware of many businesses that pay the same wages to the receptionist as they do the CEO. As I mentioned in previous post, I think the WLAX scholarship generally speaking ends up in the 18-22 range for well funded schools which covers the 14-16 girls that play and the other top few underclassmen they are developing. It is entirely possible that some of the bigger schools may drop a mens sport or 2 to help close the gap.

i see people giving out similar advice or perspective regularly on equal scholarship offerings re: title ix. as of right now, over 90% of schools do NOT have proportional scholarships, slots, etc. to that school's student body. that is happening and has happened for decades because it's not a requirement that it is proportional. nor equal. and any increase does not have to be proportional or equal.

i'm not sure most or how many football programs will want to increase scholarships to the full amount, a number of football coaches have been interviewed and 1st blush have had reservations about it. changes of course are coming, who knows what? most of it not surprisingly will be driven by money, and school specific.