D1 vs D3. What’s the difference

[Jumbo]

Curious what the views on where D3 teams would stack up against D1. I was just reading an article on the differences and the author was claiming D1 are bigger, faster, and better. To a point, I agree. But at some point, the two groups overlap. I think we can all agree that Maryland is the top team. They have bigger, faster, and better athletes than any D3 team. You can likely say the same for any top 10 D1 team. Top 20, probably the same. But at some point, maybe past top 25, the top D3 teams are as good. Maybe not as deep. Top 40? I would give the edge to top D3 programs.

Where would each of the current top 10 D3 teams fall in a D1 poll?

First group would be ranked in the high teens
SU
CNU
RIT

Next group between 25-35
Union
York
Tufts

Next group between 35-45
SJF
Bowdoin

Next group in the 50’s
Dickinson
St Lawrence

[JustOneTime]

You said it when you mentioned Bigger, Faster, Stronger. There are definitely individual D3 players that can go and play D1 and start. The transfer portal shows that each year. In terms of the team as a hole the best of D3 would still get handled by many of the D1 teams. A D1 team is made up of guys that are ALL bigger, faster and stronger. The best D3 teams may have 4 or 5 guys that could go D1 but then the rest of that team would get out run or pushed around. So the D1 teams would just find the weak link(s) and exploit those match ups.

[Dehuntshigwa’es]

I’ve been hearing this story for 100 years but lol I’ll bite bite. There aren’t any D3 teams that would crack the top 25. There are individuals, a few that are on the D3 level that can play D1 for a top 25 team. Is there a point to your question. Just enjoy your 4 years it will go quick no matter what the level

[Asgot]

In a word depth. Yea are their kids on most D3 teams that. Hold play at the D1 level. As a team I would say that the top 5 teams would beat the bottom third of D1. Games like RIT. Vs. Marist would be interesting. But, you saw what UPenn did to Cabrini last year. Tufts Beating Dartmouth was a little bit of a misnomer. Full Strength that would be an Interesting g game I think. Who dose CNU beat High Point someone in that Range.

Here’s a question. Could Salisbury beat Hopkins? Could RIT beat Cuse? Could Tufts beat Harvard. Could York beat Villanova?

[RedFromMI]

You said it when you mentioned Bigger, Faster, Stronger. There are definitely individual D3 players that can go and play D1 and start. The transfer portal shows that each year. In terms of the team as a hole the best of D3 would still get handled by many of the D1 teams. A D1 team is made up of guys that are ALL bigger, faster and stronger. The best D3 teams may have 4 or 5 guys that could go D1 but then the rest of that team would get out run or pushed around. So the D1 teams would just find the weak link(s) and exploit those match ups.

(my emphasis)

Agree with you here - and even though you do not have a direct comparison with D3, you do occasionally have D2 teams move up to D1. Merrimack announced their move to D1 shortly after losing the D2 national lax championship in an upset to Limestone in 2017. They continued on a D2 schedule for the next two years and won the next two nattys before switching to a D1 schedule.

Since the transition - they have been mired in the middle to bottom third of the D1 rankings. They are currently 53rd in the Laxpower college ratings (still maintained at http://college.laxpower2.com/menx/rating01.php). And they are and have been recruiting for D1 for some time now...

You may wish to argue that the top of D3 is far better than the top of D2, but I am no longer convinced of that. I think the gap between the top teams D2 vs D3 has narrowed over the last 20 years as D2 has grown.

[InsiderRoll]

I would say most of what’s been said here is true. The guys at the top of D1 are just different. The best division 3 programs like RIT, Salisbury, and Tufts likely don’t have any guys that didn’t have D1 offers. But very few often 0 that had ACC/B1G level offers. Which is not to say they don’t have guys that couldn’t play for those teams, they just weren’t at the talent level needed when those top teams were making recruiting decisions.

My experience as a D1 coach also tells me that there are some guys in D1 that are so beyond the talent level that exists at D3. There is a big difference in the talent level of a kid getting a 75% scholarship at UNC to the run of the mill guy getting 10-15%. Guys like Sowers, O’Neill, Gray, Ament, Bernhardt, Spencer, Durkin, Rabil, Thompson Rambo, etc. are simply too good for most of not all D3 teams to manage with much success. That is not to say that kids from D3 could not make or even contribute to top level D1 teams, just in a head to head game those types of players are the most noticeable difference.

The last point worth making is the that the level of coaching and development available to D1 players over four years is significant. Take Duke vs Tufts. Duke will literally practice more than twice, maybe even 3 times the number of times that Tufts does in a calendar year. Over four years that could be nearly 300 more college practices being taught by Danowski (x2) and Caputo. That is a significant factor in development. There is also generally a gap in coaching talent and experience, particularly at the coordinator level between D1 and D3, certainly are some outliers and some very good D3 head coaches. But even the best D3 assistants are lacking in the experience that their D1 counterparts likely already have.

[Jumbo]

You said it when you mentioned Bigger, Faster, Stronger. There are definitely individual D3 players that can go and play D1 and start. The transfer portal shows that each year. In terms of the team as a hole the best of D3 would still get handled by many of the D1 teams. A D1 team is made up of guys that are ALL bigger, faster and stronger. The best D3 teams may have 4 or 5 guys that could go D1 but then the rest of that team would get out run or pushed around. So the D1 teams would just find the weak link(s) and exploit those match ups.

(my emphasis)

Agree with you here - and even though you do not have a direct comparison with D3, you do occasionally have D2 teams move up to D1. Merrimack announced their move to D1 shortly after losing the D2 national lax championship in an upset to Limestone in 2017. They continued on a D2 schedule for the next two years and won the next two nattys before switching to a D1 schedule.

Since the transition - they have been mired in the middle to bottom third of the D1 rankings. They are currently 53rd in the Laxpower college ratings (still maintained at http://college.laxpower2.com/menx/rating01.php). And they are and have been recruiting for D1 for some time now...

You may wish to argue that the top of D3 is far better than the top of D2, but I am no longer convinced of that. I think the gap between the top teams D2 vs D3 has narrowed over the last 20 years as D2 has grown.

I think all of the gaps are narrowing. More kids playing club earlier and year round. You only have 1000 kids going D1 each year but about 5k -6k kids are playing club at each age in HS. I think that is the reason top D2 and D3 teams are getting more competitive with mid level D1.
I do think top D3 programs are getting better kids than top D2 programs. D3 gets a bad rap because there are almost 300 lax programs. Once you get past the top 50 D3, the talent really drops off.

[OSVAlacrosse]

Curious what the views on where D3 teams would stack up against D1. I was just reading an article on the differences and the author was claiming D1 are bigger, faster, and better. To a point, I agree. But at some point, the two groups overlap. I think we can all agree that Maryland is the top team. They have bigger, faster, and better athletes than any D3 team. You can likely say the same for any top 10 D1 team. Top 20, probably the same. But at some point, maybe past top 25, the top D3 teams are as good. Maybe not as deep. Top 40? I would give the edge to top D3 programs.

Where would each of the current top 10 D3 teams fall in a D1 poll?

First group would be ranked in the high teens
SU
CNU
RIT

Next group between 25-35
Union
York
Tufts

Next group between 35-45
SJF
Bowdoin

Next group in the 50’s
Dickinson
St Lawrence

I think another point to consider is that there is way more parody in D1 today. If we consider what you posted: CNU would be ranked with Duke, UNC, and Lehigh? I just don't see it and I like what CNU is doing but if they had to play a similar D1 schedule to those teams they would not be able to be competitive. However could a D3 team win a game v a D1 team? Any given Saturday I think that is the better comparison.

[RedFromMI]

Don't forget all those box guys from Canada as well - they have contributed greatly to US field lax - and provide an additional pool of players.

[JustOneTime]

Could CNU or Salisbury or RIT beat a Cleveland State, Detroit Mercy, Sacred Heart or Quinnipiac? Sure they can. But is that really competing at the D1 level? I don't think so. Those teams just sort of exist in the D1 landscape but I wouldn't really say they "compete".

[WhiteCarrera]

Jumbo - I'm gonna take a different angle on what you said. I agree that as lacrosse continues to grow in youth / HS levels, that means more and more players, but I think the D1 talent is becoming consistently better and more concentrated at that level. Also, with the growth in D2, it is a more viable "in-between", and that was a very different argument 25 years ago.

I know there's still overlap of teams that could beat higher level teams, but I think that overlap is getting smaller every year.

[InsiderRoll]

Could CNU or Salisbury or RIT beat a Cleveland State, Detroit Mercy, Sacred Heart or Quinnipiac? Sure they can. But is that really competing at the D1 level? I don't think so. Those teams just sort of exist in the D1 landscape but I wouldn't really say they "compete".

This…

I don’t think many of any of the bottom dwellers in D1 (Bottom 15) would consistently be ranked at D3. However the middle 1/3 of D1 would be capable of being a top 5 D3 program depending on the year.

There’s also a big difference in D1 teams that are fully funded (maximum number of scholarships) and the ones your are mentioning. Many of those have less than 50% of the scholarships allowed by the NCAA. Holy Cross and Lafayette only had 4 until this year. And up until only a year or two ago you couldn’t give out merit money with scholarship, so there were likely D3 programs giving out more money to recruits than D1 programs.

The big comparison that is always drawn up is D1 vs D3. But what isn’t talked about enough is the guys that are worthy of high scholarship amounts (40%+ at most legitimate programs are likely better than the best of D3). Generally speaking. Not all D1 players are equal in that regard. Big scholarship level guys are the difference between D1 and D3 in my opinion.

[Bart]

Could CNU or Salisbury or RIT beat a Cleveland State, Detroit Mercy, Sacred Heart or Quinnipiac? Sure they can. But is that really competing at the D1 level? I don't think so. Those teams just sort of exist in the D1 landscape but I wouldn't really say they "compete".

This…

I don’t think many of any of the bottom dwellers in D1 (Bottom 15) would consistently be ranked at D3. However the middle 1/3 of D1 would be capable of being a top 5 D3 program depending on the year.

There’s also a big difference in D1 teams that are fully funded (maximum number of scholarships) and the ones your are mentioning. Many of those have less than 50% of the scholarships allowed by the NCAA. Holy Cross and Lafayette only had 4 until this year. And up until only a year or two ago you couldn’t give out merit money with scholarship, so there were likely D3 programs giving out more money to recruits than D1 programs.

The big comparison that is always drawn up is D1 vs D3. But what isn’t talked about enough is the guys that are worthy of high scholarship amounts (40%+ at most legitimate programs are likely better than the best of D3). Generally speaking. Not all D1 players are equal in that regard. Big scholarship level guys are the difference between D1 and D3 in my opinion.

The problem with this argument is that on a one-off scenario the top D3 teams could compete with the middle third. But over the course of a season the depth of the D1 teams, even in the middle third, would begin to show. First line players match up well but imo once you need to rely on those below due to the normal wear and tear of the season the gap would begin to show.

This used to be able to be settled on the field. No longer the case but even that was usually a one-off scenario. (although in the 90's a few teams played several D1 teams in a season)

[InsiderRoll]

Could CNU or Salisbury or RIT beat a Cleveland State, Detroit Mercy, Sacred Heart or Quinnipiac? Sure they can. But is that really competing at the D1 level? I don't think so. Those teams just sort of exist in the D1 landscape but I wouldn't really say they "compete".

This…

I don’t think many of any of the bottom dwellers in D1 (Bottom 15) would consistently be ranked at D3. However the middle 1/3 of D1 would be capable of being a top 5 D3 program depending on the year.

There’s also a big difference in D1 teams that are fully funded (maximum number of scholarships) and the ones your are mentioning. Many of those have less than 50% of the scholarships allowed by the NCAA. Holy Cross and Lafayette only had 4 until this year. And up until only a year or two ago you couldn’t give out merit money with scholarship, so there were likely D3 programs giving out more money to recruits than D1 programs.

The big comparison that is always drawn up is D1 vs D3. But what isn’t talked about enough is the guys that are worthy of high scholarship amounts (40%+ at most legitimate programs are likely better than the best of D3). Generally speaking. Not all D1 players are equal in that regard. Big scholarship level guys are the difference between D1 and D3 in my opinion.

The problem with this argument is that on a one-off scenario the top D3 teams could compete with the middle third. But over the course of a season the depth of the D1 teams, even in the middle third, would begin to show. First line players match up well but imo once you need to rely on those below due to the normal wear and tear of the season the gap would begin to show.

This used to be able to be settled on the field. No longer the case but even that was usually a one-off scenario. (although in the 90's a few teams played several D1 teams in a season)

I think we’re saying the same thing. I was inferring that the middle third of D1 teams are all teams capable of being in the top 5 of D3 year in and year out. That’s about 25 teams that are as good as anyone in D3. There’s another 25 teams that would be average to solid D3 teams (7-RV). And another 25 teams that would very consistently and solidly beat D3s very best.

[Bart]

Could CNU or Salisbury or RIT beat a Cleveland State, Detroit Mercy, Sacred Heart or Quinnipiac? Sure they can. But is that really competing at the D1 level? I don't think so. Those teams just sort of exist in the D1 landscape but I wouldn't really say they "compete".

This…

I don’t think many of any of the bottom dwellers in D1 (Bottom 15) would consistently be ranked at D3. However the middle 1/3 of D1 would be capable of being a top 5 D3 program depending on the year.

There’s also a big difference in D1 teams that are fully funded (maximum number of scholarships) and the ones your are mentioning. Many of those have less than 50% of the scholarships allowed by the NCAA. Holy Cross and Lafayette only had 4 until this year. And up until only a year or two ago you couldn’t give out merit money with scholarship, so there were likely D3 programs giving out more money to recruits than D1 programs.

The big comparison that is always drawn up is D1 vs D3. But what isn’t talked about enough is the guys that are worthy of high scholarship amounts (40%+ at most legitimate programs are likely better than the best of D3). Generally speaking. Not all D1 players are equal in that regard. Big scholarship level guys are the difference between D1 and D3 in my opinion.

The problem with this argument is that on a one-off scenario the top D3 teams could compete with the middle third. But over the course of a season the depth of the D1 teams, even in the middle third, would begin to show. First line players match up well but imo once you need to rely on those below due to the normal wear and tear of the season the gap would begin to show.

This used to be able to be settled on the field. No longer the case but even that was usually a one-off scenario. (although in the 90's a few teams played several D1 teams in a season)

I think we’re saying the same thing. I was inferring that the middle third of D1 teams are all teams capable of being in the top 5 of D3 year in and year out. That’s about 25 teams that are as good as anyone in D3. There’s another 25 teams that would be average to solid D3 teams (7-RV). And another 25 teams that would very consistently and solidly beat D3s very best.

I think that is about right. I'd probably hedge on more of a D1 tilt than you but it is all just a thought experiment anyhow.

[Nosey Ned]

This topic is an annual exercise that always falls short of asking the obvious follow up question IMO. Just by having this discussion we should all be able to agree that there is sufficient enough talent in Top 10-15 of D3 lacrosse that I think the better (or next) question is - Would you rather be middle to end of the bench on a D1 program that never makes the NCAA tournament or would you rather START on high level D3 program that often makes deep runs in May? When you throw in the fact that you're probably getting a better degree; more aid money and can do a semester abroad to boot at that D3 program - to me its a no brainer. Go D3 all day every day! Any thoughts?

[InsiderRoll]

This topic is an annual exercise that always falls short of asking the obvious follow up question IMO. Just by having this discussion we should all be able to agree that there is sufficient enough talent in Top 10-15 of D3 lacrosse that I think the better (or next) question is - Would you rather be middle to end of the bench on a D1 program that never makes the NCAA tournament or would you rather START on high level D3 program that often makes deep runs in May? When you throw in the fact that you're probably getting a better degree; more aid money and can do a semester abroad to boot at that D3 program - to me its a no brainer. Go D3 all day every day! Any thoughts?

This argument is the reason there is a much smaller gap between the 2 levels than there is in other sports. Good point.

[DeepPocket]

This topic is an annual exercise that always falls short of asking the obvious follow up question IMO. Just by having this discussion we should all be able to agree that there is sufficient enough talent in Top 10-15 of D3 lacrosse that I think the better (or next) question is - Would you rather be middle to end of the bench on a D1 program that never makes the NCAA tournament or would you rather START on high level D3 program that often makes deep runs in May? When you throw in the fact that you're probably getting a better degree; more aid money and can do a semester abroad to boot at that D3 program - to me its a no brainer. Go D3 all day every day! Any thoughts?

Seems like a no brainer to me. But judging by the abundance of tweets “announcing my commitment to continue my athletic career at DI insert school you didn’t know had lacrosse,” how the career plays out is less important than the Division to quite a few.

[Nosey Ned]

This topic is an annual exercise that always falls short of asking the obvious follow up question IMO. Just by having this discussion we should all be able to agree that there is sufficient enough talent in Top 10-15 of D3 lacrosse that I think the better (or next) question is - Would you rather be middle to end of the bench on a D1 program that never makes the NCAA tournament or would you rather START on high level D3 program that often makes deep runs in May? When you throw in the fact that you're probably getting a better degree; more aid money and can do a semester abroad to boot at that D3 program - to me its a no brainer. Go D3 all day every day! Any thoughts?

Seems like a no brainer to me. But judging by the abundance of tweets “announcing my commitment to continue my athletic career at DI insert school you didn’t know had lacrosse,” how the career plays out is less important than the Division to quite a few.

Exactly my point. If more discussion was had around the end result and overall 4 year experience, the gap would narrow even more. As more quality players would go D3. It's the "pay for play" summer team circuit gets players and parents all tweaked up on D1 or bust and ironically many times the D1 route is the bust!

[DeepPocket]

…players and parents all tweaked up on D1 or bust and ironically many times the D1 route is the bust!

100%. My mind goes to a conversation I had with the cashier while my son’s stick was strung at our friendly local lacrosse shop. I was enthusiastically told how he had played college lacrosse “at the highest level.” A few moments later I was able to pry out the name of the school he was less than enthused to announce he had played for.