New Programs

[Deacon022]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Certainly a fact in my area. My daughter’s youth coach coached her for years with his daughter being on the team. His youngest daughter is four years younger. He’s their coach now as well. There is a four year gap of really bad play between my daughter’s grade and his youngest. The youth middle school coach is a substitute gym teacher who never played lax. The jv coach is a gym teacher who never played a sport in her life. Get a good coach and it can change things. It definitely helped my daughter but like I said, those three years don’t have a shot to have a “pied piper” so to speak.

[forthelaxofit]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Interesting. There has also been some very interesting research studies done on soccer and basketball about the socio-economic impact of “pay to play” and sports. Nutshell is the negative impact clubs are having on HS sports in general. Pre-club dominated time frame, kids without a lot of organized sport experience could still go out for HS sports, make teams and play. Now affluent suburbs kids playing year round on travel teams make that difficult. There is a social impact where non club “walk ons” don’t want to pick up the sport in HS because of skill gaps and impressions. A while back someone joked about cars in a parking lot at practices and tournaments. Think about the HS teams your kids play on. How rare is it that a top player is not from a club with years of experience and training? It can happen, but rare. Maybe Covid has contributed to it, but in HS sports (not just lacrosse) in my area, I am seeing schools that had no problem fielding Freshman, JV and Varsity teams having to cut back due to participation. Freshman teams getting dropped. Players having to be on both JV and Varsity to field and play games. Teams that had cuts in the past, less so now. The theory of these studies is the almighty money grab and big business of club sports may actually be hurting the mass growth of youth sports, not helping it. I don’t know myself what I think of all that, but we all know firsthand the cost of youth sports.

[Brownlax]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Certainly a fact in my area. My daughter’s youth coach coached her for years with his daughter being on the team. His youngest daughter is four years younger. He’s their coach now as well. There is a four year gap of really bad play between my daughter’s grade and his youngest. The youth middle school coach is a substitute gym teacher who never played lax. The jv coach is a gym teacher who never played a sport in her life. Get a good coach and it can change things. It definitely helped my daughter but like I said, those three years don’t have a shot to have a “pied piper” so to speak.

Same thing happened in our school district. Due to the teachers union contracts - if a school teacher wants the job they get first crack at it regardless of experience. This happened with several of our girl's sports at the high school level. Teachers with ZERO experience got the jobs over truly qualified candidates. As a girl dad - this pisses me off. Do you think this would ever fly if a female teacher decided that she wanted to be the varsity football coach? People would be in an uproar but was allowed to happen for the girls.

[Deacon022]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Certainly a fact in my area. My daughter’s youth coach coached her for years with his daughter being on the team. His youngest daughter is four years younger. He’s their coach now as well. There is a four year gap of really bad play between my daughter’s grade and his youngest. The youth middle school coach is a substitute gym teacher who never played lax. The jv coach is a gym teacher who never played a sport in her life. Get a good coach and it can change things. It definitely helped my daughter but like I said, those three years don’t have a shot to have a “pied piper” so to speak.

Same thing happened in our school district. Due to the teachers union contracts - if a school teacher wants the job they get first crack at it regardless of experience. This happened with several of our girl's sports at the high school level. Teachers with ZERO experience got the jobs over truly qualified candidates. As a girl dad - this pisses me off. Do you think this would ever fly if a female teacher decided that she wanted to be the varsity football coach? People would be in an uproar but was allowed to happen for the girls.

Yep. You could have Joe Montana wants to be the football coach. If the physics teacher wants that job, he gets it over Joe Cool. Insane.

[forthelaxofit]

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

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

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

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

The transfer with the bigger impact has been Penoyer with 23 points in 7 games. Maybe Earley is getting acclimated and heating up - having the game winner in a big game with time running out was huge. But D3 transfer or no, I think a top 10-15 team is hoping for more than 8 points in 7 games from a starting attack. Still plenty of time in the season to go and schedule does get easier against Big East so those numbers will improve I bet. At the end of the day though, she was brought in to help when it counts in May.

[LarryGamLax]

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

Your last sentence says it all...for you and a lot of other people.

[wlaxphan20]

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

This might be the most smooth-brained, ignorant, elitist, & pretentious post I've ever read on this forum.

[Justalaxdad]

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

Say what? Please say you’re kidding. Maybe one of the dumbest comments I’ve seen here - and that’s saying a lot.

[laxdadpat]

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

This might be the most smooth-brained, ignorant, elitist, & pretentious post I've ever read on this forum.

What part of that post is elitist, I am surprised by that comment. I am not surprised about people thinking it's wrong or dumb. I will explain a little more and please tell me if that makes me even more elitist(from a guy who grew up with a single mom in the worst part of a nice town and choose quality of school over quality of sports team).
There are 2 statements that I think may touch a nerve,

1- "ehhhhh" D2 colleges - I have watched a large number of high school girls work their asses off in AP and honors classes getting terrific grades for all their years of high school. Then when it's time to pick a college, they go to some expensive private or overpriced out-of-state school that has "ehhhh" academic standards to play a D2 sport. There is no pot of gold in womens' lacrosse, it's all about getting the best education for the least amount of money!! It makes me cringe when I hear parents ask if college ABC is a D1 or D2 school.

2-" If they really loved playing, they would have gotten good enough to have real D1 or D3 option" I'm sure that offends some, but it's the truth. Parents think that just paying thousands of dollars a year to a lacrosse club will give their daughter her choice of colleges. The players are
only getting better and competition is getting harder to play in college. There is way more academic money available than athletic money. If you aren't willing to give your daughter some tough/real advice about what they need to do away from club to really excel, then you are not seeing the entire lacrosse landscape. There is a reason so many women playing college lacrosse have parents that played sports in college. Genetics definitely help, but those parents often are willing to be the "bad guy" and tell the girls what they need to do away from practice to be good.

If this makes me elitist, I guess I am an elitist. I see it as hard work, discipline and being forward thinking is how you succeed in life.

[laxdadpat]

I may have an elitist air about me since I do refer back to a quote from my favorite doctor during tough times.

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind."
A quote from the great Dr. Seuss

[NutmegCrunch]

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

Bless your heart. I'm sure your daughter is a starter at a top-ranked D1, right? Because she really loves the game and therefore got good enough to have "real" options to play for a college whose decal you're not embarrassed to put on the back of the car.

You're the kind of "lax dad" that I actively try to avoid spending any time with.

[laxdadpat]

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

Bless your heart. I'm sure your daughter is a starter at a top-ranked D1, right? Because she really loves the game and therefore got good enough to have "real" options to play for a college whose decal you're not embarrassed to put on the back of the car.

You're the kind of "lax dad" that I actively try to avoid spending any time with.

My daughter does not play for a top ranked team, and I couldn't be more proud of her. She worked her ass off to get where see is and getting great grades. I couldn't make it 4 years playing sports and doing well in classes. She wasn't some top recruit but kept everything in perspective and has developed a tough skin and great work ethic that will serve her through life. She is not a fragile snowflake that can't take criticism, she a way better person than me!

[RollTheCrease]

D1 to D3, all of this points to picking a school one would attend w/o lacrosse. I have seen some head scratching moments where high players commit to lacrosse programs that were never on their list of schools and didn’t seem to align academically with what they wanted from a school. I’ve seen this more at the D1 level where being able to say one plays D1 overrides common sense in some cases. Play at this level varies widely. It is downright bad lacrosse towards the bottom half, so committing to play “D1” just to say one plays D1 is not a good move if it doesn’t align with your academic goals. Regardless of D1-D3, identify a list of schools you want to attend for academics, location, size, etc. Express interest to the coaches and aim for an offer from one of these schools. If it happens, great. If it doesn’t, be okay walking away from the sport, attending one of the schools on your list, and explore playing club. As mentioned by others, lacrosse will not pay the bills in the future.

[Relax77]

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

This might be the most smooth-brained, ignorant, elitist, & pretentious post I've ever read on this forum.

What part of that post is elitist, I am surprised by that comment. I am not surprised about people thinking it's wrong or dumb. I will explain a little more and please tell me if that makes me even more elitist(from a guy who grew up with a single mom in the worst part of a nice town and choose quality of school over quality of sports team).
There are 2 statements that I think may touch a nerve,

1- "ehhhhh" D2 colleges - I have watched a large number of high school girls work their asses off in AP and honors classes getting terrific grades for all their years of high school. Then when it's time to pick a college, they go to some expensive private or overpriced out-of-state school that has "ehhhh" academic standards to play a D2 sport. There is no pot of gold in womens' lacrosse, it's all about getting the best education for the least amount of money!! It makes me cringe when I hear parents ask if college ABC is a D1 or D2 school.

2-" If they really loved playing, they would have gotten good enough to have real D1 or D3 option" I'm sure that offends some, but it's the truth. Parents think that just paying thousands of dollars a year to a lacrosse club will give their daughter her choice of colleges. The players are
only getting better and competition is getting harder to play in college. There is way more academic money available than athletic money. If you aren't willing to give your daughter some tough/real advice about what they need to do away from club to really excel, then you are not seeing the entire lacrosse landscape. There is a reason so many women playing college lacrosse have parents that played sports in college. Genetics definitely help, but those parents often are willing to be the "bad guy" and tell the girls what they need to do away from practice to be good.

If this makes me elitist, I guess I am an elitist. I see it as hard work, discipline and being forward thinking is how you succeed in life.

I mostly agree with 1. Do not agree at all with #2

[LaxDadMax]

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

This might be the most smooth-brained, ignorant, elitist, & pretentious post I've ever read on this forum.

What part of that post is elitist, I am surprised by that comment. I am not surprised about people thinking it's wrong or dumb. I will explain a little more and please tell me if that makes me even more elitist(from a guy who grew up with a single mom in the worst part of a nice town and choose quality of school over quality of sports team).
There are 2 statements that I think may touch a nerve,

1- "ehhhhh" D2 colleges - I have watched a large number of high school girls work their asses off in AP and honors classes getting terrific grades for all their years of high school. Then when it's time to pick a college, they go to some expensive private or overpriced out-of-state school that has "ehhhh" academic standards to play a D2 sport. There is no pot of gold in womens' lacrosse, it's all about getting the best education for the least amount of money!! It makes me cringe when I hear parents ask if college ABC is a D1 or D2 school.

2-" If they really loved playing, they would have gotten good enough to have real D1 or D3 option" I'm sure that offends some, but it's the truth. Parents think that just paying thousands of dollars a year to a lacrosse club will give their daughter her choice of colleges. The players are
only getting better and competition is getting harder to play in college. There is way more academic money available than athletic money. If you aren't willing to give your daughter some tough/real advice about what they need to do away from club to really excel, then you are not seeing the entire lacrosse landscape. There is a reason so many women playing college lacrosse have parents that played sports in college. Genetics definitely help, but those parents often are willineg to be the "bad guy" and tell the girls what they need to do away from practice to be good.

If this makes me elitist, I guess I am an elitist. I see it as hard work, discipline and being forward thinking is how you succeed in life.

I mostly agree with 1. Do not agree at all with #2

I agree with 1 and mostly disagree with #2.

Genetics do more than help, they are usually more important than stick skills or lax IQ. Best advice we ever got was, "If you want to play for a top 40 lax team as a field player, you need to have either elite size or elite speed." If you don't have either, going to a top lax schools (which is usually a very good academic one with be tough.

There are tons of 5-5 attackers out there, who work on their game 40 hours a week, but just don't have an elite first step. Sorry, you aren't going to a top program no matter how much you work at it. There is probably space for you in college, even at D1 level. But it wont be in the Big Ten, ACC or top half of the Ivy League.

[lacrossemwj]

D1 to D3, all of this points to picking a school one would attend w/o lacrosse. I have seen some head scratching moments where high players commit to lacrosse programs that were never on their list of schools and didn’t seem to align academically with what they wanted from a school. I’ve seen this more at the D1 level where being able to say one plays D1 overrides common sense in some cases. Play at this level varies widely. It is downright bad lacrosse towards the bottom half, so committing to play “D1” just to say one plays D1 is not a good move if it doesn’t align with your academic goals. Regardless of D1-D3, identify a list of schools you want to attend for academics, location, size, etc. Express interest to the coaches and aim for an offer from one of these schools. If it happens, great. If it doesn’t, be okay walking away from the sport, attending one of the schools on your list, and explore playing club. As mentioned by others, lacrosse will not pay the bills in the future.

But these are 15 and 16 year old girls who we are asking to "walk away" from things (and things that may have been dreams from when they were very young and/or expectations that others have built for them) and who don't have the perspective that we all have. And I KNOW parents should, and do, weigh in, but again, at the end of the day these are usually the girls' decisions. It's just not that easy. And who's to say that it doesn't work out just fine for many of those girls who made those decisoins that initially seemed like headscratchers to the adults in the room.

[LaxDadMax]

D1 to D3, all of this points to picking a school one would attend w/o lacrosse. I have seen some head scratching moments where high players commit to lacrosse programs that were never on their list of schools and didn’t seem to align academically with what they wanted from a school. I’ve seen this more at the D1 level where being able to say one plays D1 overrides common sense in some cases. Play at this level varies widely. It is downright bad lacrosse towards the bottom half, so committing to play “D1” just to say one plays D1 is not a good move if it doesn’t align with your academic goals. Regardless of D1-D3, identify a list of schools you want to attend for academics, location, size, etc. Express interest to the coaches and aim for an offer from one of these schools. If it happens, great. If it doesn’t, be okay walking away from the sport, attending one of the schools on your list, and explore playing club. As mentioned by others, lacrosse will not pay the bills in the future.

But these are 15 and 16 year old girls who we are asking to "walk away" from things (and things that may have been dreams from when they were very young and/or expectations that others have built for them) and who don't have the perspective that we all have. And I KNOW parents should, and do, weigh in, but again, at the end of the day these are usually the girls' decisions. It's just not that easy. And who's to say that it doesn't work out just fine for many of those girls who made those decisoins that initially seemed like headscratchers to the adults in the room.

I think that's a fair point. But I also think lots of these girls not fully realize the committment of playing on a top 50 D1 college lacrosse program.

Are you willing to wake up at 5am every morning in the fall and 3 mornings a week in the spring? Are you willing to never go out on a weeknight? Are you willing to miss lots of football games, tailgates, etc? Are you willing to go to mandatory study halls?

Most girls understand this, but some don't until it is too late.

[Bart]

1- "ehhhhh" D2 colleges - I have watched a large number of high school girls work their asses off in AP and honors classes getting terrific grades for all their years of high school. Then when it's time to pick a college, they go to some expensive private or overpriced out-of-state school that has "ehhhh" academic standards to play a D2 sport. There is no pot of gold in womens' lacrosse, it's all about getting the best education for the least amount of money!! It makes me cringe when I hear parents ask if college ABC is a D1 or D2 school.

Let me state that I think any kid should use her lacrosse playing to get into a "higher" academic institution if that is what she wants to do. I am curious as to the bold part of your reply.

Lets say we have Suzy supersmart that has worked her ass off in AP and honors courses. She goes to super duper college that is ranked as one of the "higher selective" institutions. Her hard work pays off and she gets a 20K scholarship off a 75K price tag. When there she is a member of the lacrosse team and majors in a stem field. As part of her degree she completes a semester of undergraduate research.

Now lets say we have the same Suzy supermart and she decided to go an ehhh D2 college. Her hard work pays off and she receives a 20K academic scholarship from the same 75K price tag but also gets a 15K athletic scholarship, Suzy is a member of the lacrosse team and also a stem major. She completes a semester of undergraduate research, is in a journal club for her major and has completed an internship. She does this for 60K less over her 4 years.

Where did Suzy get the best education for the least amount of money? This is largely up to the individual. Why? Because the depth and "quality" of a college education is largely dependent on that student. Getting a degree from a "high quality" institution does not immediately translate into a better education if said student does not take advantage of everything offered at the school. Going to an ehhh school does not immediately translate to a poorer education if the student does take advantage of everything the ehhh school has to offer.

Everything is relative.

[LaxNJ71]

One thing that seems to get overlooked in the D1,2,3 discussion is that sometimes (not always) the divisions also tend to correspond with region, size, and cost of school.

For a kid looking for a larger school, there are very few D2 and D3 schools that fit the bill. There’s a few, but it’s a small batch. For kids who attended a 4k student high school, it’s hard to think of attending a college that is smaller. As well, depending on the region of schools, there aren’t many D2 lax schools in certain areas and if the kid takes the south out of the equation, it cuts down on options. And then financially - for families with decent income, they aren’t getting any financial aid or merit aid at D3 schools and of course no academic money. So that takes D3 out of the equation for a lot of kids.

Many kids end up at D1 schools because they want to play in college and there aren’t D2 and D3 schools that fit the bill bc of the factors above. And sure, plenty of these kids took AP classes and are very bright kids but they can’t afford a lot of the top academic schools, regardless of lacrosse. So attending low ranked D1 gives them the chance to play the sport they love, get a perfectly respectable education, and save some cash. Or kids who take lots of AP classes and decide to play D2, because they got a great overall deal. Just because they’re smart or talented enough to play top D3 doesn’t mean they want to (bc of money, location, size). I don’t think these decisions can be looked at simplistically.

[Brownlax]

1- "ehhhhh" D2 colleges - I have watched a large number of high school girls work their asses off in AP and honors classes getting terrific grades for all their years of high school. Then when it's time to pick a college, they go to some expensive private or overpriced out-of-state school that has "ehhhh" academic standards to play a D2 sport. There is no pot of gold in womens' lacrosse, it's all about getting the best education for the least amount of money!! It makes me cringe when I hear parents ask if college ABC is a D1 or D2 school.

Let me state that I think any kid should use her lacrosse playing to get into a "higher" academic institution if that is what she wants to do. I am curious as to the bold part of your reply.

Lets say we have Suzy supersmart that has worked her ass off in AP and honors courses. She goes to super duper college that is ranked as one of the "higher selective" institutions. Her hard work pays off and she gets a 20K scholarship off a 75K price tag. When there she is a member of the lacrosse team and majors in a stem field. As part of her degree she completes a semester of undergraduate research.

Now lets say we have the same Suzy supermart and she decided to go an ehhh D2 college. Her hard work pays off and she receives a 20K academic scholarship from the same 75K price tag but also gets a 15K athletic scholarship, Suzy is a member of the lacrosse team and also a stem major. She completes a semester of undergraduate research, is in a journal club for her major and has completed an internship. She does this for 60K less over her 4 years.

Where did Suzy get the best education for the least amount of money? This is largely up to the individual. Why? Because the depth and "quality" of a college education is largely dependent on that student. Getting a degree from a "high quality" institution does not immediately translate into a better education if said student does not take advantage of everything offered at the school. Going to an ehhh school does not immediately translate to a poorer education if the student does take advantage of everything the ehhh school has to offer.

Everything is relative.

If she has the academics, why would she not receive any Academic Scholarship money from the D1 "higher selective" institutions? A ton of my kids who I have coached received both athletic and academic money combined.