LaxPower Back-Up Stick

livelovelax wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 8:45 am RE Rutgers or any other program using the portal………the best players play. If your 18-19 year old son isn't cutting it and is getting beat out by a 22 year old D3 All American who just transferred in, who would you play? Every school is using the portal as part of the recruiting process. Rutgers lost one guy who played last year to the portal so to those who posted about promises, you know nothing. Time will tell how this all plays out but the portal is here to stay until the NCAA changes that and that doesn't look like it is changing anytime soon. The portal and NIL is here to stay, the good and the bad of both.

Managing the portal is going to be a major portion of coaching going forward. Coaches who find the balance between the program (long-term) and the team (current season) will find success. Rely too heavily on the portal and you will put culture and depth at risk. You will also inject a lot of volatility into your program (sometimes they fit together, sometimes they dont). Ignore the portal and holes on your roster will cost you tournament appearances. Just my opinion, but I think consistent high-level programs will average like 2-4 players a year.

I think that while it is quite rational for coaches to either be open to transfers or to actively pursue transfers, that doesn't mean that there aren't potential downside effects that need to be managed as well.

There have always been a few transfers that have been major difference makers, for as long as I can remember...and that's 5 decades. 1 or 2 starters can make all the difference to a team, and that's never been much of an absorption problem. Generally, a couple of terrific players joining a team are easily embraced. New guys arrive each year as freshmen...

However when the amount of transfers with a 1 year or 2 year commitment to the program is near or exceeds an entire starting team, I agree that there's very likely to be a ripple effect downstream on recruiting out of high school...and while there can be a one year burst, can a program culture that is organic championship quality be sustained?

That's the management problem.

I don't feel as strongly negatively about this "rational" decision process of coaches as I did about Early Recruiting, which the coaches themselves claimed they didn't want to do, yet refused to get organized to get a rule to stop it. That is, until the women's coaches got it done! But I don't think this heavy transfer usage is what we'd like to see on behalf of the overall college experience of the many athletes who aren't jumping schools.

Hopefully a large portion of this will burn off in the next two years.

Notre Dame got a championship because of 2 Yale transfers. The Ivy 5th year pipeline will end but the portal is here to stay.

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:24 am Notre Dame got a championship because of 2 Yale transfers. The Ivy 5th year pipeline will end but the portal is here to stay.

Interestingly, one of the reasons privately cited by some coaches on why they were doing ER is that it gave them a leg up on the Ivies who couldn't compete with early commitments.

Traditionally the Ivies generally have not participated with transfers other than some JUCO's to Cornell, though the TD transfer from Albany to Yale, shocked many in the league into considering it. Penn has done a couple. Not sure many others

The Admissions offices really frown on this at most of the Ivies, I know that Dartmouth has only done at most 1-3 athlete transfers across all sports in any year and have been opposed to it on principle, as they do very few inbound transfers for any reason. The institutional commitment is to the class that matriculates together.

Given what is happening, we had this discussion at a recent Friends BD meeting with the new AD...didn't get a clear answer on that one, as I suspect the school hasn't yet shifted its policies. If any happen it'll be a big deal, real arm twisting/persuasion.

I'd think some of that friction exists at all the Ivies.

So...I suspect that ACC and Big 10 coaches would privately say that it gives them a leg up on the Ivies.

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:24 am Notre Dame got a championship because of 2 Yale transfers. The Ivy 5th year pipeline will end but the portal is here to stay.

Portal back to 2019 pre covid, go back you will see a hand full of impact players in portal.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:35 am

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:24 am Notre Dame got a championship because of 2 Yale transfers. The Ivy 5th year pipeline will end but the portal is here to stay.

Interestingly, one of the reasons privately cited by some coaches on why they were doing ER is that it gave them a leg up on the Ivies who couldn't compete with early commitments.

Traditionally the Ivies generally have not participated with transfers other than some JUCO's to Cornell, though the TD transfer from Albany to Yale, shocked many in the league into considering it. Penn has done a couple. Not sure many others

The Admissions offices really frown on this at most of the Ivies, I know that Dartmouth has only done at most 1-3 athlete transfers across all sports in any year and have been opposed to it on principle, as they do very few inbound transfers for any reason. The institutional commitment is to the class that matriculates together.

Given what is happening, we had this discussion at a recent Friends BD meeting with the new AD...didn't get a clear answer on that one, as I suspect the school hasn't yet shifted its policies. If any happen it'll be a big deal, real arm twisting/persuasion.

I'd think some of that friction exists at all the Ivies.

So...I suspect that ACC and Big 10 coaches would privately say that it gives them a leg up on the Ivies.

As something of a footnote, Harvard also got SSDM Chase Yager as a transfer from D3 Amherst; Yager (a Virginia native) will be taking his Covid year as a grad transfer to UVA.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:35 am

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:24 am Notre Dame got a championship because of 2 Yale transfers. The Ivy 5th year pipeline will end but the portal is here to stay.

Interestingly, one of the reasons privately cited by some coaches on why they were doing ER is that it gave them a leg up on the Ivies who couldn't compete with early commitments.

Traditionally the Ivies generally have not participated with transfers other than some JUCO's to Cornell, though the TD transfer from Albany to Yale, shocked many in the league into considering it. Penn has done a couple. Not sure many others

The Admissions offices really frown on this at most of the Ivies, I know that Dartmouth has only done at most 1-3 athlete transfers across all sports in any year and have been opposed to it on principle, as they do very few inbound transfers for any reason. The institutional commitment is to the class that matriculates together.

Given what is happening, we had this discussion at a recent Friends BD meeting with the new AD...didn't get a clear answer on that one, as I suspect the school hasn't yet shifted its policies. If any happen it'll be a big deal, real arm twisting/persuasion.

I'd think some of that friction exists at all the Ivies.

So...I suspect that ACC and Big 10 coaches would privately say that it gives them a leg up on the Ivies.

I only remember 1 lax transfer, which was outbound to Penn. And if I recall the buzz correctly the Dartmouth Admissions office played a role.

FannOLax wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:42 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:35 am

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:24 am Notre Dame got a championship because of 2 Yale transfers. The Ivy 5th year pipeline will end but the portal is here to stay.

Interestingly, one of the reasons privately cited by some coaches on why they were doing ER is that it gave them a leg up on the Ivies who couldn't compete with early commitments.

Traditionally the Ivies generally have not participated with transfers other than some JUCO's to Cornell, though the TD transfer from Albany to Yale, shocked many in the league into considering it. Penn has done a couple. Not sure many others

The Admissions offices really frown on this at most of the Ivies, I know that Dartmouth has only done at most 1-3 athlete transfers across all sports in any year and have been opposed to it on principle, as they do very few inbound transfers for any reason. The institutional commitment is to the class that matriculates together.

Given what is happening, we had this discussion at a recent Friends BD meeting with the new AD...didn't get a clear answer on that one, as I suspect the school hasn't yet shifted its policies. If any happen it'll be a big deal, real arm twisting/persuasion.

I'd think some of that friction exists at all the Ivies.

So...I suspect that ACC and Big 10 coaches would privately say that it gives them a leg up on the Ivies.

As something of a footnote, Harvard also got SSDM Chase Yager as a transfer from D3 Amherst; Yager (a Virginia native) will be taking his Covid year as a grad transfer to UVA.

Good example as well.
Pretty unusual situation, during Covid and after Jon Thompson got fired, if I'm not mistaken.
Had one freshman season in 2019, 4 games in 2020...good GB's
Two seasons, 2022 and 2023 at Harvard.

SSDM stud now, 50 GBs and 27 CTO's in 2 seasons as SSDM...one man clear.
Should be a nice fit for UVA ala Zinn.

Looking at his freshman pic at Amherst and now...same guy, different flow...

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:01 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:35 am

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:24 am Notre Dame got a championship because of 2 Yale transfers. The Ivy 5th year pipeline will end but the portal is here to stay.

Interestingly, one of the reasons privately cited by some coaches on why they were doing ER is that it gave them a leg up on the Ivies who couldn't compete with early commitments.

Traditionally the Ivies generally have not participated with transfers other than some JUCO's to Cornell, though the TD transfer from Albany to Yale, shocked many in the league into considering it. Penn has done a couple. Not sure many others

The Admissions offices really frown on this at most of the Ivies, I know that Dartmouth has only done at most 1-3 athlete transfers across all sports in any year and have been opposed to it on principle, as they do very few inbound transfers for any reason. The institutional commitment is to the class that matriculates together.

Given what is happening, we had this discussion at a recent Friends BD meeting with the new AD...didn't get a clear answer on that one, as I suspect the school hasn't yet shifted its policies. If any happen it'll be a big deal, real arm twisting/persuasion.

I'd think some of that friction exists at all the Ivies.

So...I suspect that ACC and Big 10 coaches would privately say that it gives them a leg up on the Ivies.

I only remember 1 lax transfer, which was outbound to Penn. And if I recall the buzz correctly the Dartmouth Admissions office played a role.

Who was that?

IF I'm not mistaken, Penn took a goalie from UVA's roster, Burkinshaw.
And FOGO Mac Eldridge this year.
Not sure how many others, but my recollection is there are a couple others...but could easily be mistaken...I don't have an issue with this, just know that there's a lot of friction against inbound at the Ivies generally.

As I said, there's discussion about it. I could be mistaken about this as well, but I don't recall an inbound transfer to Dartmouth lax in the past 5+ decades.

Jldlax wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:08 am

livelovelax wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 8:45 am RE Rutgers or any other program using the portal………the best players play. If your 18-19 year old son isn't cutting it and is getting beat out by a 22 year old D3 All American who just transferred in, who would you play? Every school is using the portal as part of the recruiting process. Rutgers lost one guy who played last year to the portal so to those who posted about promises, you know nothing. Time will tell how this all plays out but the portal is here to stay until the NCAA changes that and that doesn't look like it is changing anytime soon. The portal and NIL is here to stay, the good and the bad of both.

I really don't want to hear about teams like Rutgers, Jacksonville, etc. using the portal with the very top teams using it as well. The last 2 national champions used it and this year all of the ACC and Big 10 teams are as well. UVA already has multiple 5 star attackman on the roster/coming in next year, yet they go out a get the Tufts A transfer. They had the top 2022 FO man behind LaSala. He leaves are they get 2 top FO transfers. ND wins the NC this year and immediately announces 4 top transfers. One can go on and on. The bottom line is the inane COVID year ruling plus NIL changes the landscape, and any coach in his right mind will take advantage of the changed landscape.

NIL has nothing to do w lacrosse but the Covid year ruling yes.

coda wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:18 am

livelovelax wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 8:45 am RE Rutgers or any other program using the portal………the best players play. If your 18-19 year old son isn't cutting it and is getting beat out by a 22 year old D3 All American who just transferred in, who would you play? Every school is using the portal as part of the recruiting process. Rutgers lost one guy who played last year to the portal so to those who posted about promises, you know nothing. Time will tell how this all plays out but the portal is here to stay until the NCAA changes that and that doesn't look like it is changing anytime soon. The portal and NIL is here to stay, the good and the bad of both.

Managing the portal is going to be a major portion of coaching going forward. Coaches who find the balance between the program (long-term) and the team (current season) will find success. Rely too heavily on the portal and you will put culture and depth at risk. You will also inject a lot of volatility into your program (sometimes they fit together, sometimes they dont). Ignore the portal and holes on your roster will cost you tournament appearances. Just my opinion, but I think consistent high-level programs will average like 2-4 players a year.

8-11 is a totally different story. In the Rutgers case using it so prolifically illustrates either a failure to recruit or failure to develop. It’s too much. Defunding it as binary in their case is silly. This isn’t selective use.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:18 am

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:01 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:35 am

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:24 am Notre Dame got a championship because of 2 Yale transfers. The Ivy 5th year pipeline will end but the portal is here to stay.

Interestingly, one of the reasons privately cited by some coaches on why they were doing ER is that it gave them a leg up on the Ivies who couldn't compete with early commitments.

Traditionally the Ivies generally have not participated with transfers other than some JUCO's to Cornell, though the TD transfer from Albany to Yale, shocked many in the league into considering it. Penn has done a couple. Not sure many others

The Admissions offices really frown on this at most of the Ivies, I know that Dartmouth has only done at most 1-3 athlete transfers across all sports in any year and have been opposed to it on principle, as they do very few inbound transfers for any reason. The institutional commitment is to the class that matriculates together.

Given what is happening, we had this discussion at a recent Friends BD meeting with the new AD...didn't get a clear answer on that one, as I suspect the school hasn't yet shifted its policies. If any happen it'll be a big deal, real arm twisting/persuasion.

I'd think some of that friction exists at all the Ivies.

So...I suspect that ACC and Big 10 coaches would privately say that it gives them a leg up on the Ivies.

I only remember 1 lax transfer, which was outbound to Penn. And if I recall the buzz correctly the Dartmouth Admissions office played a role.

Who was that?

IF I'm not mistaken, Penn took a goalie from UVA's roster, Burkinshaw.
And FOGO Mac Eldridge this year.
Not sure how many others, but my recollection is there are a couple others...but could easily be mistaken...I don't have an issue with this, just know that there's a lot of friction against inbound at the Ivies generally.

As I said, there's discussion about it. I could be mistaken about this as well, but I don't recall an inbound transfer to Dartmouth lax in the past 5+ decades.

I'll leave the name out. Roughly 20 years ago. Was a Penn lacrosse legacy. The buzz was his younger brother got into Penn and not Dartmouth so he transferred.

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:30 am

coda wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:18 am

livelovelax wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 8:45 am RE Rutgers or any other program using the portal………the best players play. If your 18-19 year old son isn't cutting it and is getting beat out by a 22 year old D3 All American who just transferred in, who would you play? Every school is using the portal as part of the recruiting process. Rutgers lost one guy who played last year to the portal so to those who posted about promises, you know nothing. Time will tell how this all plays out but the portal is here to stay until the NCAA changes that and that doesn't look like it is changing anytime soon. The portal and NIL is here to stay, the good and the bad of both.

Managing the portal is going to be a major portion of coaching going forward. Coaches who find the balance between the program (long-term) and the team (current season) will find success. Rely too heavily on the portal and you will put culture and depth at risk. You will also inject a lot of volatility into your program (sometimes they fit together, sometimes they dont). Ignore the portal and holes on your roster will cost you tournament appearances. Just my opinion, but I think consistent high-level programs will average like 2-4 players a year.

8-11 is a totally different story. In the Rutgers case using it so prolifically illustrates either a failure to recruit or failure to develop. It’s too much. Defunding it as binary in their case is silly. This isn’t selective use.

I agree. That is setting the portal as your foundation. It speaks to poor recruiting and development. You recruit and build a program in hopes to put out 10 starters that can compete in the tournament. If you need 11 players, that is an indictment of your program, especially when you have been there for so long.

rutgers transfers are as follows:

SSDM, SSDM, SSDM, FOGO, FOGO, D, D, Attack, Attack, Goalie

Sidorski, more of a A/M guy, isn't confirmed to my knowledge.

and no offense to the goalie, he's more of a depth guy.

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:40 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:18 am

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:01 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:35 am

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:24 am Notre Dame got a championship because of 2 Yale transfers. The Ivy 5th year pipeline will end but the portal is here to stay.

Interestingly, one of the reasons privately cited by some coaches on why they were doing ER is that it gave them a leg up on the Ivies who couldn't compete with early commitments.

Traditionally the Ivies generally have not participated with transfers other than some JUCO's to Cornell, though the TD transfer from Albany to Yale, shocked many in the league into considering it. Penn has done a couple. Not sure many others

The Admissions offices really frown on this at most of the Ivies, I know that Dartmouth has only done at most 1-3 athlete transfers across all sports in any year and have been opposed to it on principle, as they do very few inbound transfers for any reason. The institutional commitment is to the class that matriculates together.

Given what is happening, we had this discussion at a recent Friends BD meeting with the new AD...didn't get a clear answer on that one, as I suspect the school hasn't yet shifted its policies. If any happen it'll be a big deal, real arm twisting/persuasion.

I'd think some of that friction exists at all the Ivies.

So...I suspect that ACC and Big 10 coaches would privately say that it gives them a leg up on the Ivies.

I only remember 1 lax transfer, which was outbound to Penn. And if I recall the buzz correctly the Dartmouth Admissions office played a role.

Who was that?

IF I'm not mistaken, Penn took a goalie from UVA's roster, Burkinshaw.
And FOGO Mac Eldridge this year.
Not sure how many others, but my recollection is there are a couple others...but could easily be mistaken...I don't have an issue with this, just know that there's a lot of friction against inbound at the Ivies generally.

As I said, there's discussion about it. I could be mistaken about this as well, but I don't recall an inbound transfer to Dartmouth lax in the past 5+ decades.

I'll leave the name out. Roughly 20 years ago. Was a Penn lacrosse legacy. The buzz was his younger brother got into Penn and not Dartmouth so he transferred.

Why leave the name out? It's not a badge of dishonor.

Also, I don't quite follow...he was a Penn lax legacy (as was the brother) and the younger brother DID get into Penn but not Dartmouth...So, the older transferred to Penn...from Dartmouth? Dartmouth's loss because they didn't take the younger brother? Happens...also no badge of dishonor.

I can understand that motivation, of course.

But I thought the transfer was TO Dartmouth FROM Penn, not the other way around...but I see, reading again, that you were saying it, I just misread. Right?

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:29 am

Jldlax wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:08 am

livelovelax wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 8:45 am RE Rutgers or any other program using the portal………the best players play. If your 18-19 year old son isn't cutting it and is getting beat out by a 22 year old D3 All American who just transferred in, who would you play? Every school is using the portal as part of the recruiting process. Rutgers lost one guy who played last year to the portal so to those who posted about promises, you know nothing. Time will tell how this all plays out but the portal is here to stay until the NCAA changes that and that doesn't look like it is changing anytime soon. The portal and NIL is here to stay, the good and the bad of both.

I really don't want to hear about teams like Rutgers, Jacksonville, etc. using the portal with the very top teams using it as well. The last 2 national champions used it and this year all of the ACC and Big 10 teams are as well. UVA already has multiple 5 star attackman on the roster/coming in next year, yet they go out a get the Tufts A transfer. They had the top 2022 FO man behind LaSala. He leaves are they get 2 top FO transfers. ND wins the NC this year and immediately announces 4 top transfers. One can go on and on. The bottom line is the inane COVID year ruling plus NIL changes the landscape, and any coach in his right mind will take advantage of the changed landscape.

NIL has nothing to do w lacrosse but the Covid year ruling yes.

What do to mean by NIL has nothing to do with lacrosse? The ruling impacts all sports.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:18 am

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:01 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:35 am

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:24 am Notre Dame got a championship because of 2 Yale transfers. The Ivy 5th year pipeline will end but the portal is here to stay.

Interestingly, one of the reasons privately cited by some coaches on why they were doing ER is that it gave them a leg up on the Ivies who couldn't compete with early commitments.

Traditionally the Ivies generally have not participated with transfers other than some JUCO's to Cornell, though the TD transfer from Albany to Yale, shocked many in the league into considering it. Penn has done a couple. Not sure many others

The Admissions offices really frown on this at most of the Ivies, I know that Dartmouth has only done at most 1-3 athlete transfers across all sports in any year and have been opposed to it on principle, as they do very few inbound transfers for any reason. The institutional commitment is to the class that matriculates together.

Given what is happening, we had this discussion at a recent Friends BD meeting with the new AD...didn't get a clear answer on that one, as I suspect the school hasn't yet shifted its policies. If any happen it'll be a big deal, real arm twisting/persuasion.

I'd think some of that friction exists at all the Ivies.

So...I suspect that ACC and Big 10 coaches would privately say that it gives them a leg up on the Ivies.

I only remember 1 lax transfer, which was outbound to Penn. And if I recall the buzz correctly the Dartmouth Admissions office played a role.

Who was that?

IF I'm not mistaken, Penn took a goalie from UVA's roster, Burkinshaw.
And FOGO Mac Eldridge this year.
Not sure how many others, but my recollection is there are a couple others...but could easily be mistaken...I don't have an issue with this, just know that there's a lot of friction against inbound at the Ivies generally.

As I said, there's discussion about it. I could be mistaken about this as well, but I don't recall an inbound transfer to Dartmouth lax in the past 5+ decades.

It's very difficult for any of the Ivies to transfer a player in after their sophomore year due to push back from Admissions. You won't see any of the Ivies compete for a transfer unless they're only 1 year into their college education (athletic eligibility isn't the issue). Redshirt freshman only have 2 years of schooling left and I've been told that isn't a student they want to admit.

BrownDad wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 11:31 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:18 am

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:01 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:35 am

mdk01 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:24 am Notre Dame got a championship because of 2 Yale transfers. The Ivy 5th year pipeline will end but the portal is here to stay.

Interestingly, one of the reasons privately cited by some coaches on why they were doing ER is that it gave them a leg up on the Ivies who couldn't compete with early commitments.

Traditionally the Ivies generally have not participated with transfers other than some JUCO's to Cornell, though the TD transfer from Albany to Yale, shocked many in the league into considering it. Penn has done a couple. Not sure many others

The Admissions offices really frown on this at most of the Ivies, I know that Dartmouth has only done at most 1-3 athlete transfers across all sports in any year and have been opposed to it on principle, as they do very few inbound transfers for any reason. The institutional commitment is to the class that matriculates together.

Given what is happening, we had this discussion at a recent Friends BD meeting with the new AD...didn't get a clear answer on that one, as I suspect the school hasn't yet shifted its policies. If any happen it'll be a big deal, real arm twisting/persuasion.

I'd think some of that friction exists at all the Ivies.

So...I suspect that ACC and Big 10 coaches would privately say that it gives them a leg up on the Ivies.

I only remember 1 lax transfer, which was outbound to Penn. And if I recall the buzz correctly the Dartmouth Admissions office played a role.

Who was that?

IF I'm not mistaken, Penn took a goalie from UVA's roster, Burkinshaw.
And FOGO Mac Eldridge this year.
Not sure how many others, but my recollection is there are a couple others...but could easily be mistaken...I don't have an issue with this, just know that there's a lot of friction against inbound at the Ivies generally.

As I said, there's discussion about it. I could be mistaken about this as well, but I don't recall an inbound transfer to Dartmouth lax in the past 5+ decades.

It's very difficult for any of the Ivies to transfer a player in after their sophomore year due to push back from Admissions. You won't see any of the Ivies compete for a transfer unless they're only 1 year into their college education (athletic eligibility isn't the issue). Redshirt freshman only have 2 years of schooling left and I've been told that isn't a student they want to admit.

I agree and yet there have recently been some exceptions. TD Ierlan to Yale, Chase Yager to Harvard, have been mentioned above as after sophomore seasons. (the two mentioned to Penn were after freshman seasons. And I recall that this year Brown picked 3 up after their freshman seasons, McLane, Lineman, and Corsi, all major impact players)

The big thing is that most of the Ivy Admissions offices rarely take ANY transfers, even after just one year of school, much less after sophomore season. So, doing this to bolster a sports team, in an already charged environment over how admissions are allocated, is gonna be a problem...

OSVAlacrosse wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 11:24 am

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:29 am

Jldlax wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:08 am

livelovelax wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 8:45 am RE Rutgers or any other program using the portal………the best players play. If your 18-19 year old son isn't cutting it and is getting beat out by a 22 year old D3 All American who just transferred in, who would you play? Every school is using the portal as part of the recruiting process. Rutgers lost one guy who played last year to the portal so to those who posted about promises, you know nothing. Time will tell how this all plays out but the portal is here to stay until the NCAA changes that and that doesn't look like it is changing anytime soon. The portal and NIL is here to stay, the good and the bad of both.

I really don't want to hear about teams like Rutgers, Jacksonville, etc. using the portal with the very top teams using it as well. The last 2 national champions used it and this year all of the ACC and Big 10 teams are as well. UVA already has multiple 5 star attackman on the roster/coming in next year, yet they go out a get the Tufts A transfer. They had the top 2022 FO man behind LaSala. He leaves are they get 2 top FO transfers. ND wins the NC this year and immediately announces 4 top transfers. One can go on and on. The bottom line is the inane COVID year ruling plus NIL changes the landscape, and any coach in his right mind will take advantage of the changed landscape.

NIL has nothing to do w lacrosse but the Covid year ruling yes.

What do to mean by NIL has nothing to do with lacrosse? The ruling impacts all sports.

Of course it does but with comparing it to football and kids transferring over money it doesn’t.

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:30 am

coda wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 9:18 am

livelovelax wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 8:45 am RE Rutgers or any other program using the portal………the best players play. If your 18-19 year old son isn't cutting it and is getting beat out by a 22 year old D3 All American who just transferred in, who would you play? Every school is using the portal as part of the recruiting process. Rutgers lost one guy who played last year to the portal so to those who posted about promises, you know nothing. Time will tell how this all plays out but the portal is here to stay until the NCAA changes that and that doesn't look like it is changing anytime soon. The portal and NIL is here to stay, the good and the bad of both.

Managing the portal is going to be a major portion of coaching going forward. Coaches who find the balance between the program (long-term) and the team (current season) will find success. Rely too heavily on the portal and you will put culture and depth at risk. You will also inject a lot of volatility into your program (sometimes they fit together, sometimes they dont). Ignore the portal and holes on your roster will cost you tournament appearances. Just my opinion, but I think consistent high-level programs will average like 2-4 players a year.

8-11 is a totally different story. In the Rutgers case using it so prolifically illustrates either a failure to recruit or failure to develop. It’s too much. Defunding it as binary in their case is silly. This isn’t selective use.

The portal is recruiting. If you aren't bringing in proven players when you have a chance, it's because you can't. Some schools like Hobart are feeder schools now.

Brecht has developed more homegrown AA than I can think of off the top of my head. So your take is patently false.