NESCAC

[NNELax]

… there are some kids who would and do go the D3 route there because of the opportunity to have more of a regular college life when not having the all consuming time commitments involved at such schools.

This may historically be true, but I have to believe that with the commitment required in HS/club to be at a level to be sought by high level DI lacrosse teams nowadays, one has to be driven and committed beyond belief (throw in the individual drive to have IVY acceptance caliber grades). So much so in fact that I would bet there are more high level HS lacrosse players who chose to not play in college at all (due to not wanting the commitment / burnt out / whatever) than there are that chose D3 over a legitimate top tier DI. Just my 2 cents.

I would say, historically, if a kid is not getting looks from the likes of a top DI or an Ivy, the first word coming out every parents mouth on the sidelines is NESCAC, it is just the natural progression in the lacrosse world, so a lot of those kids are pretty driven and committed, but obviously with the same academic hurdles as the Ivy league. However, you are probably right that, outside of the NESCAC or some of the other top 20 D3 schools making offers, a lot of high level kids just chose not to play, whether due to the fact that they do not want the commitment, or perhaps because they are embarrassed that they put in all of the time and energy playing club and things did not work out.

I'd throw burnout onto that short list of reasons. So many kids in this hyper-focused, specialized age of youth sports hit a wall man. See it all the time. The lack of athletic diversity starting at age 6-7 that I've seen in my own backyard just breeds it. So many for profit organizations out there that have zero interest in slowing the train down. Deserves it's own thread, but man, it's bananas.

I live in an area where the 3 sport HS athlete is making a comeback. Most of the club coaches preach multi-sport, as do the HS coaches. The sport itself is growing at a breakneck pace, over 220 HS programs in our state, double of what we had 20 yrs ago. I don't see kids quitting, if anything I see more participation from the kids that were marginal players via D2, D3, and the MCLA club leagues. I know kids playing Tenn, FSU, SC, GT, Col, the D2 Fla circuit is pretty good as well. The NESCAC or bust thing is a non-factor in my opinion. If kids want to play, and they're good enough, they'll find a school.

Club coaches say they like multi-sport athletes until it hits their bottomline....

Then you need to find another club.

I would say sadly it's the majority....especially in the NE

[laxdad1434]

… there are some kids who would and do go the D3 route there because of the opportunity to have more of a regular college life when not having the all consuming time commitments involved at such schools.

This may historically be true, but I have to believe that with the commitment required in HS/club to be at a level to be sought by high level DI lacrosse teams nowadays, one has to be driven and committed beyond belief (throw in the individual drive to have IVY acceptance caliber grades). So much so in fact that I would bet there are more high level HS lacrosse players who chose to not play in college at all (due to not wanting the commitment / burnt out / whatever) than there are that chose D3 over a legitimate top tier DI. Just my 2 cents.

I would say, historically, if a kid is not getting looks from the likes of a top DI or an Ivy, the first word coming out every parents mouth on the sidelines is NESCAC, it is just the natural progression in the lacrosse world, so a lot of those kids are pretty driven and committed, but obviously with the same academic hurdles as the Ivy league. However, you are probably right that, outside of the NESCAC or some of the other top 20 D3 schools making offers, a lot of high level kids just chose not to play, whether due to the fact that they do not want the commitment, or perhaps because they are embarrassed that they put in all of the time and energy playing club and things did not work out.

I'd throw burnout onto that short list of reasons. So many kids in this hyper-focused, specialized age of youth sports hit a wall man. See it all the time. The lack of athletic diversity starting at age 6-7 that I've seen in my own backyard just breeds it. So many for profit organizations out there that have zero interest in slowing the train down. Deserves it's own thread, but man, it's bananas.

I live in an area where the 3 sport HS athlete is making a comeback. Most of the club coaches preach multi-sport, as do the HS coaches. The sport itself is growing at a breakneck pace, over 220 HS programs in our state, double of what we had 20 yrs ago. I don't see kids quitting, if anything I see more participation from the kids that were marginal players via D2, D3, and the MCLA club leagues. I know kids playing Tenn, FSU, SC, GT, Col, the D2 Fla circuit is pretty good as well. The NESCAC or bust thing is a non-factor in my opinion. If kids want to play, and they're good enough, they'll find a school.

I am surprised no one has mentioned cost. Don’t players need to consider affordability in making their college selection? There are real differences in merit aid that schools even within the same conference provide. I would never encourage a player to accrue debt just to play at one school versus another. In addition, the majority of players on D1 rosters are not receiving lax money. Finally, with the growth of the game and clubs there are a tremendous number of high level players being produced. More than enough to populate all Divisions. In comparison, there are over 120 more women’s college teams than men’s.

Tuition cost, roster size, location, desired major, all came into play when going thru the process. You're correct about the $, 12.6 scholarships wacked up between 50 kids doesn't go far, with the bulk of that sliced up between the best players. The growth of the game is great for men and women, I wish this sport was around in my area when I was a kid.

[laxdad1434]

… there are some kids who would and do go the D3 route there because of the opportunity to have more of a regular college life when not having the all consuming time commitments involved at such schools.

This may historically be true, but I have to believe that with the commitment required in HS/club to be at a level to be sought by high level DI lacrosse teams nowadays, one has to be driven and committed beyond belief (throw in the individual drive to have IVY acceptance caliber grades). So much so in fact that I would bet there are more high level HS lacrosse players who chose to not play in college at all (due to not wanting the commitment / burnt out / whatever) than there are that chose D3 over a legitimate top tier DI. Just my 2 cents.

I would say, historically, if a kid is not getting looks from the likes of a top DI or an Ivy, the first word coming out every parents mouth on the sidelines is NESCAC, it is just the natural progression in the lacrosse world, so a lot of those kids are pretty driven and committed, but obviously with the same academic hurdles as the Ivy league. However, you are probably right that, outside of the NESCAC or some of the other top 20 D3 schools making offers, a lot of high level kids just chose not to play, whether due to the fact that they do not want the commitment, or perhaps because they are embarrassed that they put in all of the time and energy playing club and things did not work out.

I'd throw burnout onto that short list of reasons. So many kids in this hyper-focused, specialized age of youth sports hit a wall man. See it all the time. The lack of athletic diversity starting at age 6-7 that I've seen in my own backyard just breeds it. So many for profit organizations out there that have zero interest in slowing the train down. Deserves it's own thread, but man, it's bananas.

I live in an area where the 3 sport HS athlete is making a comeback. Most of the club coaches preach multi-sport, as do the HS coaches. The sport itself is growing at a breakneck pace, over 220 HS programs in our state, double of what we had 20 yrs ago. I don't see kids quitting, if anything I see more participation from the kids that were marginal players via D2, D3, and the MCLA club leagues. I know kids playing Tenn, FSU, SC, GT, Col, the D2 Fla circuit is pretty good as well. The NESCAC or bust thing is a non-factor in my opinion. If kids want to play, and they're good enough, they'll find a school.

Club coaches say they like multi-sport athletes until it hits their bottomline....

Then you need to find another club.

I would say sadly it's the majority....especially in the NE

Honestly, we never experienced that in NJ.

[shorelax12]

… there are some kids who would and do go the D3 route there because of the opportunity to have more of a regular college life when not having the all consuming time commitments involved at such schools.

This may historically be true, but I have to believe that with the commitment required in HS/club to be at a level to be sought by high level DI lacrosse teams nowadays, one has to be driven and committed beyond belief (throw in the individual drive to have IVY acceptance caliber grades). So much so in fact that I would bet there are more high level HS lacrosse players who chose to not play in college at all (due to not wanting the commitment / burnt out / whatever) than there are that chose D3 over a legitimate top tier DI. Just my 2 cents.

I would say, historically, if a kid is not getting looks from the likes of a top DI or an Ivy, the first word coming out every parents mouth on the sidelines is NESCAC, it is just the natural progression in the lacrosse world, so a lot of those kids are pretty driven and committed, but obviously with the same academic hurdles as the Ivy league. However, you are probably right that, outside of the NESCAC or some of the other top 20 D3 schools making offers, a lot of high level kids just chose not to play, whether due to the fact that they do not want the commitment, or perhaps because they are embarrassed that they put in all of the time and energy playing club and things did not work out.

I'd throw burnout onto that short list of reasons. So many kids in this hyper-focused, specialized age of youth sports hit a wall man. See it all the time. The lack of athletic diversity starting at age 6-7 that I've seen in my own backyard just breeds it. So many for profit organizations out there that have zero interest in slowing the train down. Deserves it's own thread, but man, it's bananas.

I live in an area where the 3 sport HS athlete is making a comeback. Most of the club coaches preach multi-sport, as do the HS coaches. The sport itself is growing at a breakneck pace, over 220 HS programs in our state, double of what we had 20 yrs ago. I don't see kids quitting, if anything I see more participation from the kids that were marginal players via D2, D3, and the MCLA club leagues. I know kids playing Tenn, FSU, SC, GT, Col, the D2 Fla circuit is pretty good as well. The NESCAC or bust thing is a non-factor in my opinion. If kids want to play, and they're good enough, they'll find a school.

I am surprised no one has mentioned cost. Don’t players need to consider affordability in making their college selection? There are real differences in merit aid that schools even within the same conference provide. I would never encourage a player to accrue debt just to play at one school versus another. In addition, the majority of players on D1 rosters are not receiving lax money. Finally, with the growth of the game and clubs there are a tremendous number of high level players being produced. More than enough to populate all Divisions. In comparison, there are over 120 more women’s college teams than men’s.

Tuition cost, roster size, location, desired major, all came into play when going thru the process. You're correct about the $, 12.6 scholarships wacked up between 50 kids doesn't go far, with the bulk of that sliced up between the best players. The growth of the game is great for men and women, I wish this sport was around in my area when I was a kid.

My son and I had this discussion some time ago when he was going through the process, curious as to others thoughts. When the 9/1 commitments started rolling in, in addition to the obvious commits, there were a lot of good, but not top, players committing in-state. Do you think that coaches at places like UVA, UNC, Mich., OSU and the like, seek out as many in-state kids as possible with the knowledge that a scholarship, or a large portion thereof, does not have to be used up on an in-state player who gets the benefit of in-state tuition.

[Jumbo]

… there are some kids who would and do go the D3 route there because of the opportunity to have more of a regular college life when not having the all consuming time commitments involved at such schools.

This may historically be true, but I have to believe that with the commitment required in HS/club to be at a level to be sought by high level DI lacrosse teams nowadays, one has to be driven and committed beyond belief (throw in the individual drive to have IVY acceptance caliber grades). So much so in fact that I would bet there are more high level HS lacrosse players who chose to not play in college at all (due to not wanting the commitment / burnt out / whatever) than there are that chose D3 over a legitimate top tier DI. Just my 2 cents.

I would say, historically, if a kid is not getting looks from the likes of a top DI or an Ivy, the first word coming out every parents mouth on the sidelines is NESCAC, it is just the natural progression in the lacrosse world, so a lot of those kids are pretty driven and committed, but obviously with the same academic hurdles as the Ivy league. However, you are probably right that, outside of the NESCAC or some of the other top 20 D3 schools making offers, a lot of high level kids just chose not to play, whether due to the fact that they do not want the commitment, or perhaps because they are embarrassed that they put in all of the time and energy playing club and things did not work out.

I'd throw burnout onto that short list of reasons. So many kids in this hyper-focused, specialized age of youth sports hit a wall man. See it all the time. The lack of athletic diversity starting at age 6-7 that I've seen in my own backyard just breeds it. So many for profit organizations out there that have zero interest in slowing the train down. Deserves it's own thread, but man, it's bananas.

I live in an area where the 3 sport HS athlete is making a comeback. Most of the club coaches preach multi-sport, as do the HS coaches. The sport itself is growing at a breakneck pace, over 220 HS programs in our state, double of what we had 20 yrs ago. I don't see kids quitting, if anything I see more participation from the kids that were marginal players via D2, D3, and the MCLA club leagues. I know kids playing Tenn, FSU, SC, GT, Col, the D2 Fla circuit is pretty good as well. The NESCAC or bust thing is a non-factor in my opinion. If kids want to play, and they're good enough, they'll find a school.

I am surprised no one has mentioned cost. Don’t players need to consider affordability in making their college selection? There are real differences in merit aid that schools even within the same conference provide. I would never encourage a player to accrue debt just to play at one school versus another. In addition, the majority of players on D1 rosters are not receiving lax money. Finally, with the growth of the game and clubs there are a tremendous number of high level players being produced. More than enough to populate all Divisions. In comparison, there are over 120 more women’s college teams than men’s.

Tuition cost, roster size, location, desired major, all came into play when going thru the process. You're correct about the $, 12.6 scholarships wacked up between 50 kids doesn't go far, with the bulk of that sliced up between the best players. The growth of the game is great for men and women, I wish this sport was around in my area when I was a kid.

My son and I had this discussion some time ago when he was going through the process, curious as to others thoughts. When the 9/1 commitments started rolling in, in addition to the obvious commits, there were a lot of good, but not top, players committing in-state. Do you think that coaches at places like UVA, UNC, Mich., OSU and the like, seek out as many in-state kids as possible with the knowledge that a scholarship, or a large portion thereof, does not have to be used up on an in-state player who gets the benefit of in-state tuition.

Absolutely not. Coaches are hired to win. They will look for the best talent they can get. Regardless of where they are from.

[Laxforeveryone]

… there are some kids who would and do go the D3 route there because of the opportunity to have more of a regular college life when not having the all consuming time commitments involved at such schools.

This may historically be true, but I have to believe that with the commitment required in HS/club to be at a level to be sought by high level DI lacrosse teams nowadays, one has to be driven and committed beyond belief (throw in the individual drive to have IVY acceptance caliber grades). So much so in fact that I would bet there are more high level HS lacrosse players who chose to not play in college at all (due to not wanting the commitment / burnt out / whatever) than there are that chose D3 over a legitimate top tier DI. Just my 2 cents.

I would say, historically, if a kid is not getting looks from the likes of a top DI or an Ivy, the first word coming out every parents mouth on the sidelines is NESCAC, it is just the natural progression in the lacrosse world, so a lot of those kids are pretty driven and committed, but obviously with the same academic hurdles as the Ivy league. However, you are probably right that, outside of the NESCAC or some of the other top 20 D3 schools making offers, a lot of high level kids just chose not to play, whether due to the fact that they do not want the commitment, or perhaps because they are embarrassed that they put in all of the time and energy playing club and things did not work out.

I'd throw burnout onto that short list of reasons. So many kids in this hyper-focused, specialized age of youth sports hit a wall man. See it all the time. The lack of athletic diversity starting at age 6-7 that I've seen in my own backyard just breeds it. So many for profit organizations out there that have zero interest in slowing the train down. Deserves it's own thread, but man, it's bananas.

I live in an area where the 3 sport HS athlete is making a comeback. Most of the club coaches preach multi-sport, as do the HS coaches. The sport itself is growing at a breakneck pace, over 220 HS programs in our state, double of what we had 20 yrs ago. I don't see kids quitting, if anything I see more participation from the kids that were marginal players via D2, D3, and the MCLA club leagues. I know kids playing Tenn, FSU, SC, GT, Col, the D2 Fla circuit is pretty good as well. The NESCAC or bust thing is a non-factor in my opinion. If kids want to play, and they're good enough, they'll find a school.

I am surprised no one has mentioned cost. Don’t players need to consider affordability in making their college selection? There are real differences in merit aid that schools even within the same conference provide. I would never encourage a player to accrue debt just to play at one school versus another. In addition, the majority of players on D1 rosters are not receiving lax money. Finally, with the growth of the game and clubs there are a tremendous number of high level players being produced. More than enough to populate all Divisions. In comparison, there are over 120 more women’s college teams than men’s.

Tuition cost, roster size, location, desired major, all came into play when going thru the process. You're correct about the $, 12.6 scholarships wacked up between 50 kids doesn't go far, with the bulk of that sliced up between the best players. The growth of the game is great for men and women, I wish this sport was around in my area when I was a kid.

My son and I had this discussion some time ago when he was going through the process, curious as to others thoughts. When the 9/1 commitments started rolling in, in addition to the obvious commits, there were a lot of good, but not top, players committing in-state. Do you think that coaches at places like UVA, UNC, Mich., OSU and the like, seek out as many in-state kids as possible with the knowledge that a scholarship, or a large portion thereof, does not have to be used up on an in-state player who gets the benefit of in-state tuition.

Absolutely not. Coaches are hired to win. They will look for the best talent they can get. Regardless of where they are from.

That’s an interesting point. The only thing that I have found is that there seems to be such an assumption of wealth in the lacrosse world and general disregard for the financial piece. Even as far as the entire recruitment/commitment process. At all levels this is taking place largely before senior year and without firm commitment or guarantee of financial aid. Not to mention there is so little recruitment from public schools anymore.

[shorelax12]

… there are some kids who would and do go the D3 route there because of the opportunity to have more of a regular college life when not having the all consuming time commitments involved at such schools.

This may historically be true, but I have to believe that with the commitment required in HS/club to be at a level to be sought by high level DI lacrosse teams nowadays, one has to be driven and committed beyond belief (throw in the individual drive to have IVY acceptance caliber grades). So much so in fact that I would bet there are more high level HS lacrosse players who chose to not play in college at all (due to not wanting the commitment / burnt out / whatever) than there are that chose D3 over a legitimate top tier DI. Just my 2 cents.

I would say, historically, if a kid is not getting looks from the likes of a top DI or an Ivy, the first word coming out every parents mouth on the sidelines is NESCAC, it is just the natural progression in the lacrosse world, so a lot of those kids are pretty driven and committed, but obviously with the same academic hurdles as the Ivy league. However, you are probably right that, outside of the NESCAC or some of the other top 20 D3 schools making offers, a lot of high level kids just chose not to play, whether due to the fact that they do not want the commitment, or perhaps because they are embarrassed that they put in all of the time and energy playing club and things did not work out.

I'd throw burnout onto that short list of reasons. So many kids in this hyper-focused, specialized age of youth sports hit a wall man. See it all the time. The lack of athletic diversity starting at age 6-7 that I've seen in my own backyard just breeds it. So many for profit organizations out there that have zero interest in slowing the train down. Deserves it's own thread, but man, it's bananas.

I live in an area where the 3 sport HS athlete is making a comeback. Most of the club coaches preach multi-sport, as do the HS coaches. The sport itself is growing at a breakneck pace, over 220 HS programs in our state, double of what we had 20 yrs ago. I don't see kids quitting, if anything I see more participation from the kids that were marginal players via D2, D3, and the MCLA club leagues. I know kids playing Tenn, FSU, SC, GT, Col, the D2 Fla circuit is pretty good as well. The NESCAC or bust thing is a non-factor in my opinion. If kids want to play, and they're good enough, they'll find a school.

I am surprised no one has mentioned cost. Don’t players need to consider affordability in making their college selection? There are real differences in merit aid that schools even within the same conference provide. I would never encourage a player to accrue debt just to play at one school versus another. In addition, the majority of players on D1 rosters are not receiving lax money. Finally, with the growth of the game and clubs there are a tremendous number of high level players being produced. More than enough to populate all Divisions. In comparison, there are over 120 more women’s college teams than men’s.

Tuition cost, roster size, location, desired major, all came into play when going thru the process. You're correct about the $, 12.6 scholarships wacked up between 50 kids doesn't go far, with the bulk of that sliced up between the best players. The growth of the game is great for men and women, I wish this sport was around in my area when I was a kid.

My son and I had this discussion some time ago when he was going through the process, curious as to others thoughts. When the 9/1 commitments started rolling in, in addition to the obvious commits, there were a lot of good, but not top, players committing in-state. Do you think that coaches at places like UVA, UNC, Mich., OSU and the like, seek out as many in-state kids as possible with the knowledge that a scholarship, or a large portion thereof, does not have to be used up on an in-state player who gets the benefit of in-state tuition.

Absolutely not. Coaches are hired to win. They will look for the best talent they can get. Regardless of where they are from.

I get it, but if that kid is basically there for the taking, and its not affecting your overall recruiting from a scholarship perspective, do you give that kid an offer. And to be clear, I am not talking about a weaker player, I am just talking about the kid that you would not expect to commit around 9/1, but one that would maybe commit to a similar level school later down the road.

[justanotherperson]

… This idea has nothing at all to do specifically to NESCAC teams, has nothing to do with how midlevel D3 teams would do vs D1 and nothing at all with how top D3 teams or their players would do against or at top D1 schools. That probably won't stop those strawmen from being ambushed though.

You bristling at the very notion of a simple comparison is very much NESCAC specific. The beginning (I think 10+ pages ago) was “how many Duke players Bates needed to win the NESCAC.” The fanboy knee jerk reaction that was something to the effect of “virtually the entire Duke starting lineup” generated this. We could have this conversation with other top D3 teams and conferences, but right now we’re not. Right now we’re on a NESCAC thread talking about comparing the NESCAC to NJIT.

Actually if I remember correctly from the 1000 pages dedicated to this was the majority said 1-3 duke players.

-from a non-NESCAC dad

[justanotherperson]

Where are the players from Binghamton, LIU, NJIT, Bellarmine, etc.?

Those kids typically transfer to mid D3s, which are on par with the lowest D1s ...

That's untrue. LIU was mid D1 level program until this past yr there coach left for NJIT and there top 6 players transferred out but not to mid D 3 but to higher D 1. Coach Wolf had an eye for overlooked talent and moved the program from D 2 to D 1. Yr 1 with D 2 kids still around they struggled but yr 2 and on they competed very well in D1. He was building a solid program and it's a shame he left and didn't get to keep building. They took a big step back last season losing so much too talent and new coach playing seniors who barerly saw the field and wouldn't have if the team stayed together. LIU's best players transferred to higher D 1 schools. Will Mark- Syracuse, Jake Murphy - Syracuse and was in top 4 rotation at SSDM, Richie Lacalandra- Ohio State - started first 4 games at attack then left program, Chris Cambell - Umass - top pole at Umass and made PLL Archers game roster week 1, Justin Joseph- Drexel starting Fogo, Blake Behlen - Stonybrook- started at Attack. This past yr the new coach didn't like playing freshman so played seniors who were career backups and they struggled. If that team didn't break up they would have won the MAAC easy. They were in a tougher conference NEC with St Joes, Bryant and Hobart. LIU lost 11 - 10 to St Joes in conference tournament which StJoes won and then lost 18 - 16 in a great game vs Yale in NCAA tournament. Bryant won the yr before and took NCAA champs Virginia to final minute. LIU has some talented young kids so they will move back up to a mid D 1 program soon. Now for D 3 the top teams like Salsiberry or Tufts they can probably win the MAAC which is the weakest conference in D 1. Marist won and got blown off the field by Deleware In tournament. Next conferences like American East u for Albany, Vermont and Bryant, CAA u got Townson Deleware, Stonybrook then A 10 is St Joes, Richmond and High Point. Salsiberry can hang some with those teams but depth would hurt them. 2dn line mids on D 3 are not D 1 players at those schools. Their is many players in D 3 that can play on top 20 D 1 schools for sure. Cross Ferreira wousl have been a star at any top program and Boyden should be a stud at Virginia. Kids choose lower D 1 for scholarship money and a chance to win there conference tournament and just get an opportunity to play on an NCAA tournament game which they watched and dreamed of as a kid. Now kids who don't play much at Lower D 1 just go there to say they played D 1 because they should go to a mid D 3 and play. Sorry so long lol

LIU lost to Lindenwood last year….

Yes last yr as their coach left and 6 of there best players transferred out. Backup seniors played last yr when they lost to Lindinwood. 2022 team would have beat them 20 - 5. U obviously didn't read what I wrote. They had an All American goalie in Will Mark and two time NEC player of the yr Richie Lacalandra. 6 of there best player's transfered. Just go on YouTube and look at the 2022 highlights u will see the difference in talent. NJIT offered Coach Wolf more money so he left and so did all there best players. They have young talent so they will get better soon. Freshman Jake Lewis was Nassue County Attackman of the yr and an All American. Last season the team was depleted. I get last season they were weak I was explaining what happened and that there kids didn't transfer to mid D 3 but higher D 1 programs. They lost a lot of talent. No big deal tho

And, Lindenwood had players. Their leading scorer transferred to Penn State.

Yes Scarce or something like that he's a very good player. I was just saying that LIU there 6 best players transfered out when Coach Wolf left. 2 went to Syracuse, 1 Ohio State, 1 Umass, 1 Drexel and 1 Stonybrook. They lost all there top talent and the new coach does not like to play freshman so he played Seniors who were career backups and wouldn't have played much at all if there top players didn't transfer out. That's all I was just explaining what happened to them and why they dropped so low this past season. Coach Wolf was building a solid program but LIU didn't match the pay raise NJIT offered him so he left and so did there best players. It's a shame they didn't offer him more money he brought the team up from D 2 and recruited a lot of underrated players which they transferred to higher level programs. He was doing a great job and deserved more money but can't blame him for going with a higher paying job. I didn't mean to bring up any D 3 to D 1 nonsense I didn't know it was an issue before. Lol I watch D 3 games, D 2 games and D 1. There is talent all over these days.

No issues, just a lot of ultra-sensitive NESCACians that get butt hurt very easily. Everything you've posted is on point, the overall talent between the divisions is wide, as should be expected.

I hear NJIT players like Wolf, big change from the previous coaches. He has brought in good assistants, former D1 players, with ties to the area that will help with recruiting in the tri-state, Pa. area. I'm looking forward to catching a few games down in Newark.

Well, with their admissions rate, it shouldn't be a problem for him to get any kids into NJIT that he wants.

That doesn't mean what you think it does. Maybe this will help you;
College acceptance rates are a ratio—the number of total applicants to accepted students. For example, if 100 people apply to a college and 10 are accepted, the college has a 10% acceptance rate.

Yield is 18%

College acceptance rates have both a numerator and denominator so it can be gamed either way

[RE6ULATOR]

... Don't recall anyone saying Bates would need the whole starting lineup of Duke to win the NESCAC but many people did say that they would indeed need more than 2 or 3 people, regardless of who they were.

Actually if I remember correctly from the 1000 pages dedicated to this was the majority said 1-3 duke players.

-from a non-NESCAC dad

Well here’s one…

I think you give that Bates team the whole duke roster and they still don’t win the NESCAC…

And another…

… saying the conference's worst team is only two players away from being better than one of D-III's perennial powers massively underrates the top (and even the middle) of the conference. The NESCAC isn't D-I...but it also isn't the SAA. Again: Bates went 0-10 in conference play and lost by less than a touchdown once in those ten games. Adding two guys doesn't close that gap…

Looking back, Deep said 2 and people freaked by the notion that 2 players of any skill could make a Bates that much better. It was on that principle that this avalanche of DI to DIII talent comparison has began to slide. Thats the knee jerk reaction, and it’s magnificent.

[justanotherperson]

If you took the entire NJIT roster and slipped them into Bates uniforms, what’s their NESCAC record?

I'll say 3-7 with wins over Trinity, Colby, and Wesleyan

See, I feel confident that Tufts would beat them, consistently. After that I don’t feel confident. I could see them hanging in that Midd, Bowdoin, Williams, and perhaps even Amherst group. NESCAC conference games seem like so many rivalry matches across sports, where unless there’s a severe mismatch, it’s going to be a tight hard fought game, regardless of the numbers next to the names. That’s what I think has so many people seemingly delusional about the depth of strength within the conference. Bowdoin can play NESCAC team _____ close, but there is a general lack of other comparables throughout the year (I know, I know- distance, but that explains the reason, it doesn’t discredit the hypothesis).

Amherst, Union, and Middlebury can compete with anyone in D3. Bowdoin is hit or miss.

As for the NJIT team. Just looking at the rosters and where the kids grew up playing and accolades. I am going to say NJIT would fall somewhere in the middle of the NESCAC.

Compare the roster to top level D3 programs and you will find those programs are loaded with first team all state or all metro. Lower level D1 teams tend to get All league or county. Yes. Some all metro kids do go low level D1. Was just saying in general

Stevens beats NESCAC schools...Stevens. NJIT would beat Stevens by 15, it's a different level. If NESCAC is so loaded, why aren't these kids playing for an Ivy league? Same pool of kids, right? If NJIT and Tufts played 10 times, Tufts wins 3. NJIT would wear them out. So would Monmouth, Stony Brook, Hofstra, Binghamton, Marist.

Do you watch lacrosse? Serious question.

1. I am not sure why you use Stevens as an example, they have been mediocre since 2018. The only NESCAC they have beaten since then was Wesleyan last year, who has been struggling.

2. Stony Brook and Hofstra are not bottom of the barrel d1's by any means. NJIT DIDN'T WIN A GAME IN 2022. They have 6 wins since 2019 and two are against Hampton and Lindenwood!! They are not good..... Neither is Monmouth, their best win in the last five years in Quinnipiac.

3. I am sure a majority of these players applied and visited / met with IVY coaches and had their reasons for either going IVY or NESCAC. Most likely if they had the grades to play at an IVY, why not go the NESCAC route which is on par academically if the ivy didn't work out. Also, I am sure there are IVY coaches who passed on the likes of Boyden, Bredahl, Jacoby, Upgren, Bruun, Stump, Hawthorne, Dan Murphy, Byrne, Mullane etc and definitely would have loved to have those players on there teams.

Ok yea very true. Idk if u can say they had there reasons for going choosing NESCAC over Ivy. I believe u guys that the conference has a lot of talent but you can't compare it to the Ivy League. Dartmouth ok would be good games but Cornell, Princeton and Harvard there is no way Union and these teams are competing with those teams. No way are kids choosing D3 over playing at an IVY. That's pushing it to much. I believe they can beat low level D1 but most Ivys are high level.

This is where Im jumping off the NESCAC bandwagon (again as non NESCAC) dad. For most kids, it is Ivy THEN NESCAC, not Ivy OR NESCAC. I am assuming the majority of kids, if they got offers from both, would choose Ivy schools over NESCAC schools. I think there are definitely exceptions: want a small LAC environment or dont want the D1 grind (though D3 is definitely not easy either).

Looking at the larger picture of high D3 / NESCAC vs mid-low D1 is that, for the most part, we are arguing a hypothetical that is too hard to compare. The venn diagrams of a NESCAC commit vs a low-mid D1 commit probably have very little overlap. I can look at my sons experience with his recruitment where he had some very middling Ivy interest, some decent NESCAC interest and quite a bit of mid-low D1 interest. But to him and many of his club teams and classmates, they didnt have any interest in most of the D1 schools that were not academically inclined

Most of them were looking forward to the next aspect of their lives beyond lacrosse which was: the big college experience, academics and future employment so they cared very little about lacrosse if it meant sacrificing the right academic school. Lacrosse was purely an afterthought even as talented as they were, but not quite talented enough to play at an Ivy, Duke, Virginia, UNC, Hopkins, ND, Georgetown, Michigan. So they choose the next best option which is either NESCAC, swarthmore, W&L or MCLA. My son said himself there were only about 10 D1 schools he would ever consider playing for. Otherwise, it was no lacrosse or MCLA (he had no interest in small colleges).

So we will never answer the question of NJIT vs the NESCAC. Maybe the NESCAC throng is underestimating the talent at NJIT (and now LIU which has been drawn into the maelstrom) but I can tell you that in the New England, there are plenty of really good lacrosse players who chose not to go D1 below a certain school and ended up at a NESCAC, MCLA or ended up dropping lacrosse completely purely for academic reasons. I have no doubt that tufts would win 9/10 times against NJIT, the next 6 would win 5/10 and the rest is a toss up because the top line NESCAC players on each team are that talented. They just chose not to go anywhere else if they couldnt play for an Ivy or a NESCAC. This is not to say LIU, Wagner, Cleveland state, NJIT are bad schools. Any kid going to school or trade school is a good thing. Those d1 schools didn’t fit what many of my kids classmates were looking for

And just when I though this thread had moved on. Thanks LIU dad - totally kidding, appreciate your thoughts and insight on your experience.

[justanotherperson]

... Don't recall anyone saying Bates would need the whole starting lineup of Duke to win the NESCAC but many people did say that they would indeed need more than 2 or 3 people, regardless of who they were.

Actually if I remember correctly from the 1000 pages dedicated to this was the majority said 1-3 duke players.

-from a non-NESCAC dad

Well here’s one…

I think you give that Bates team the whole duke roster and they still don’t win the NESCAC…

And another…

… saying the conference's worst team is only two players away from being better than one of D-III's perennial powers massively underrates the top (and even the middle) of the conference. The NESCAC isn't D-I...but it also isn't the SAA. Again: Bates went 0-10 in conference play and lost by less than a touchdown once in those ten games. Adding two guys doesn't close that gap…

Looking back, Deep said 2 and people freaked by the notion that 2 players of any skill could make a Bates that much better. It was on that principle that this avalanche of DI to DIII talent comparison has began to slide. Thats the knee jerk reaction, and it’s magnificent.

Like I said, the majority said 1-3. So the two examples certainly dont qualify a knee jerk reaction by the the rest of the group which I am assuming, maybe incorrectly, was tongue in cheek because, cmon, if the whole Duke roster transferred to a D3 team...

[pcowlax]

... Don't recall anyone saying Bates would need the whole starting lineup of Duke to win the NESCAC but many people did say that they would indeed need more than 2 or 3 people, regardless of who they were.

Actually if I remember correctly from the 1000 pages dedicated to this was the majority said 1-3 duke players.

-from a non-NESCAC dad

Well here’s one…

I think you give that Bates team the whole duke roster and they still don’t win the NESCAC…

And another…

… saying the conference's worst team is only two players away from being better than one of D-III's perennial powers massively underrates the top (and even the middle) of the conference. The NESCAC isn't D-I...but it also isn't the SAA. Again: Bates went 0-10 in conference play and lost by less than a touchdown once in those ten games. Adding two guys doesn't close that gap…

Looking back, Deep said 2 and people freaked by the notion that 2 players of any skill could make a Bates that much better. It was on that principle that this avalanche of DI to DIII talent comparison has began to slide. Thats the knee jerk reaction, and it’s magnificent.

Like I said, the majority said 1-3. So the two examples certainly dont qualify a knee jerk reaction by the the rest of the group which I am assuming, maybe incorrectly, was tongue in cheek because, cmon, if the whole Duke roster transferred to a D3 team...

I'm not sure why you quoted those two regulator. Brickwall was obviously being facetious as a dig on how bad Bates was, actually not making any comment at all on D1 vs D3 (he said the whole Duke roster, not just the starting lineup, which is obviously a joke) and ah23 said that it would have to be more than 2, which I agree with and is pretty self-evidently true. Maybe someone said, in seriousness, that it would take the whole starting lineup but pretty sure you hallucinated that. Personally I think 5 would do it and would go with 2 attack, 2 D and a mid.

[RE6ULATOR]

... Don't recall anyone saying Bates would need the whole starting lineup of Duke to win the NESCAC but many people did say that they would indeed need more than 2 or 3 people, regardless of who they were.

Actually if I remember correctly from the 1000 pages dedicated to this was the majority said 1-3 duke players.

-from a non-NESCAC dad

Well here’s one…

I think you give that Bates team the whole duke roster and they still don’t win the NESCAC…

And another…

… saying the conference's worst team is only two players away from being better than one of D-III's perennial powers massively underrates the top (and even the middle) of the conference. The NESCAC isn't D-I...but it also isn't the SAA. Again: Bates went 0-10 in conference play and lost by less than a touchdown once in those ten games. Adding two guys doesn't close that gap…

Looking back, Deep said 2 and people freaked by the notion that 2 players of any skill could make a Bates that much better. It was on that principle that this avalanche of DI to DIII talent comparison has began to slide. Thats the knee jerk reaction, and it’s magnificent.

Like I said, the majority said 1-3. So the two examples certainly dont qualify a knee jerk reaction by the the rest of the group which I am assuming, maybe incorrectly, was tongue in cheek because, cmon, if the whole Duke roster transferred to a D3 team...

I don’t recall saying everybody had a knee jerk, or even the majority had a knee jerk reaction, I said—

You bristling at the very notion of a simple comparison is very much NESCAC specific. The beginning (I think 10+ pages ago) was “how many Duke players Bates needed to win the NESCAC.” The fanboy knee jerk reaction that was something to the effect of “virtually the entire Duke starting lineup” generated this. We could have this conversation with other top D3 teams and conferences, but right now we’re not. Right now we’re on a NESCAC thread talking about comparing the NESCAC to NJIT.

Can’t one person, in the minority or otherwise, have a knee jerk reaction?

… the majority said 1-3. So the two examples certainly dont qualify a knee jerk reaction by the the rest of the group…

[choochooCharlie]

I’ll just leave this here…

[DeepPocket]

Looking back, Deep said...

Do me a favor and keep me out of this mess.

[creasecone66]

Naso, McAdorey, Brower, and Carpenter transfer to Bates and they’re conference runner up, I think Brennan and a mid like Aidan maguire or one of the caputos and they can dethrone the jumbos.

Thank you to lax dad and the Highlander nation for firing up the thread.

[laxdad1434]

Naso, McAdorey, Brower, and Carpenter transfer to Bates and they’re conference runner up, I think Brennan and a mid like Aidan maguire or one of the caputos and they can dethrone the jumbos.

Thank you to lax dad and the Highlander nation for firing up the thread.

anytime...

Disclaimer;
I have no relationship or attachment to NJIT

[Jumbo]

... Don't recall anyone saying Bates would need the whole starting lineup of Duke to win the NESCAC but many people did say that they would indeed need more than 2 or 3 people, regardless of who they were.

Actually if I remember correctly from the 1000 pages dedicated to this was the majority said 1-3 duke players.

-from a non-NESCAC dad

Well here’s one…

I think you give that Bates team the whole duke roster and they still don’t win the NESCAC…

And another…

… saying the conference's worst team is only two players away from being better than one of D-III's perennial powers massively underrates the top (and even the middle) of the conference. The NESCAC isn't D-I...but it also isn't the SAA. Again: Bates went 0-10 in conference play and lost by less than a touchdown once in those ten games. Adding two guys doesn't close that gap…

Looking back, Deep said 2 and people freaked by the notion that 2 players of any skill could make a Bates that much better. It was on that principle that this avalanche of DI to DIII talent comparison has began to slide. Thats the knee jerk reaction, and it’s magnificent.

Like I said, the majority said 1-3. So the two examples certainly dont qualify a knee jerk reaction by the the rest of the group which I am assuming, maybe incorrectly, was tongue in cheek because, cmon, if the whole Duke roster transferred to a D3 team...

I am going to say Bates with 5 Duke starters would win the NESCAC.
FOGO
Goalie
Left attack
Starting offensive middie
Close defense

[callaxdad]

Where are the players from Binghamton, LIU, NJIT, Bellarmine, etc.?

Those kids typically transfer to mid D3s, which are on par with the lowest D1s ...

That's untrue. LIU was mid D1 level program until this past yr there coach left for NJIT and there top 6 players transferred out but not to mid D 3 but to higher D 1. Coach Wolf had an eye for overlooked talent and moved the program from D 2 to D 1. Yr 1 with D 2 kids still around they struggled but yr 2 and on they competed very well in D1. He was building a solid program and it's a shame he left and didn't get to keep building. They took a big step back last season losing so much too talent and new coach playing seniors who barerly saw the field and wouldn't have if the team stayed together. LIU's best players transferred to higher D 1 schools. Will Mark- Syracuse, Jake Murphy - Syracuse and was in top 4 rotation at SSDM, Richie Lacalandra- Ohio State - started first 4 games at attack then left program, Chris Cambell - Umass - top pole at Umass and made PLL Archers game roster week 1, Justin Joseph- Drexel starting Fogo, Blake Behlen - Stonybrook- started at Attack. This past yr the new coach didn't like playing freshman so played seniors who were career backups and they struggled. If that team didn't break up they would have won the MAAC easy. They were in a tougher conference NEC with St Joes, Bryant and Hobart. LIU lost 11 - 10 to St Joes in conference tournament which StJoes won and then lost 18 - 16 in a great game vs Yale in NCAA tournament. Bryant won the yr before and took NCAA champs Virginia to final minute. LIU has some talented young kids so they will move back up to a mid D 1 program soon. Now for D 3 the top teams like Salsiberry or Tufts they can probably win the MAAC which is the weakest conference in D 1. Marist won and got blown off the field by Deleware In tournament. Next conferences like American East u for Albany, Vermont and Bryant, CAA u got Townson Deleware, Stonybrook then A 10 is St Joes, Richmond and High Point. Salsiberry can hang some with those teams but depth would hurt them. 2dn line mids on D 3 are not D 1 players at those schools. Their is many players in D 3 that can play on top 20 D 1 schools for sure. Cross Ferreira wousl have been a star at any top program and Boyden should be a stud at Virginia. Kids choose lower D 1 for scholarship money and a chance to win there conference tournament and just get an opportunity to play on an NCAA tournament game which they watched and dreamed of as a kid. Now kids who don't play much at Lower D 1 just go there to say they played D 1 because they should go to a mid D 3 and play. Sorry so long lol

LIU lost to Lindenwood last year….

Yes last yr as their coach left and 6 of there best players transferred out. Backup seniors played last yr when they lost to Lindinwood. 2022 team would have beat them 20 - 5. U obviously didn't read what I wrote. They had an All American goalie in Will Mark and two time NEC player of the yr Richie Lacalandra. 6 of there best player's transfered. Just go on YouTube and look at the 2022 highlights u will see the difference in talent. NJIT offered Coach Wolf more money so he left and so did all there best players. They have young talent so they will get better soon. Freshman Jake Lewis was Nassue County Attackman of the yr and an All American. Last season the team was depleted. I get last season they were weak I was explaining what happened and that there kids didn't transfer to mid D 3 but higher D 1 programs. They lost a lot of talent. No big deal tho

And, Lindenwood had players. Their leading scorer transferred to Penn State.

Yes Scarce or something like that he's a very good player. I was just saying that LIU there 6 best players transfered out when Coach Wolf left. 2 went to Syracuse, 1 Ohio State, 1 Umass, 1 Drexel and 1 Stonybrook. They lost all there top talent and the new coach does not like to play freshman so he played Seniors who were career backups and wouldn't have played much at all if there top players didn't transfer out. That's all I was just explaining what happened to them and why they dropped so low this past season. Coach Wolf was building a solid program but LIU didn't match the pay raise NJIT offered him so he left and so did there best players. It's a shame they didn't offer him more money he brought the team up from D 2 and recruited a lot of underrated players which they transferred to higher level programs. He was doing a great job and deserved more money but can't blame him for going with a higher paying job. I didn't mean to bring up any D 3 to D 1 nonsense I didn't know it was an issue before. Lol I watch D 3 games, D 2 games and D 1. There is talent all over these days.

No issues, just a lot of ultra-sensitive NESCACians that get butt hurt very easily. Everything you've posted is on point, the overall talent between the divisions is wide, as should be expected.

I hear NJIT players like Wolf, big change from the previous coaches. He has brought in good assistants, former D1 players, with ties to the area that will help with recruiting in the tri-state, Pa. area. I'm looking forward to catching a few games down in Newark.

I suspect that there is an America East or NEC forum that would welcome you both with open arms, us butt-hurt NESCACians would just like to live in peace with our sore rears and ignorance about these high level D1 programs

Priceless Shore!! Well done!!