2028 Girls Lacrosse

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um…a lot of the Baltimore parents I know are 1%ers

Agree. Confused by the reaction here. Why wouldn’t those with means put those resources to work helping their kids attend the best academic schools they can to secure their futures?

Of course you would. The point is if you can’t afford the school, you are not going.

But this is about lacrosse and no reasonable person is going to argue that VA has anywhere near the talent at any ‘28 that M&D, Coppermine and Hero’s have. An all star team of the MD team at ‘28 would wipe the floor with the VA kids. So, we’ll see how ‘28 does. My bet is the MD kids will be just fine.

It is about lacrosse, a game many players use to put them on a flight path to attend a great academic school which will set them up for the rest of their lives. To deny this is to misunderstand the very reason why so many play the sport.

That is one reason but for you, it is the only reason. You likely make the game joyless for your 8th grader with your relentless emphasis on college recruiting. Get them to love the game first for the joy of playing and if she has talent, she’ll be fine. The top talent at ‘28 (for the country) is clearly in MD.

If you believe I’m pushing your stated view on my DD, you’re doing the same thing by pushing the rank-is-everything / we’re-better-than-you-at-lacrosse mantra on yours. To this end, should we assume the incessant narrative you push should be held to a higher standard than being a supportive parent, helping them through wins (and yes losses), championing their work in the classroom, encouraging them to be goal-oriented beyond the field, and being selfless in providing every resource we as parents have to set them up for lifelong success? Or is being number one, or three, or five more important than these virtues?

I use the rankings as empirical evidence that at 2028 MD is light years ahead of VA in terms of talent. You imply that Capital historically has better success than MD clubs placing girls at top 20 or Ivies and that recruiting is what this is all about. Since you cannot read between the lines, I will explain to you in basic terms: the overwhelming majority of talent in the area is on MDU, M&D, Hero’s, Coppermine and Crush. All 5 are ranked in the top 10. No VA team is in the top 10 but Pride is sniffing it (at I think, 14th but with no huge standout player). Stars is a non-entity in the high ‘30s. Capital is good at recruiting, they are not miracle workers. ‘28 will not be a good year for Capital recruiting based on all available evidence and MD girls should do much better.

One more shutdown for Maryland man before we call it a day...here goes:

Capital recruiting will be just fine for the 2028 class, as it has been consistently. The argument that 2028 will be a weak recruiting year for Capital because no Virginia club is ranked higher than the Baltimore top 5, is entirely unpersuasive, as that has been the case almost every year. And yet Capital has still been able to put together very strong teams, with very strong recruiting results.

The 2025 class experience is directly on point. PP notes that the top 2028 VA team is Pride at #14 followed by Stars in the high 30s. Guess how the 2025 class at those clubs finished their 8th grade season--Pride at #13 and Stars at #38! That's almost exactly where we are now. The top players on those teams went on to Capital, and the Capital 2025 team is now ranked #1 in the country.

Here is a snapshot of how they are doing on recruiting so far: UNC; Duke (2); Johns Hopkins (2); Michigan; Notre Dame; Denver; Florida; Dartmouth; Stanford; Navy; Colorado; VA Tech; Colgate; Cincinnati; Marquette etc. That's 7 to programs in the preseason top 20 for lacrosse; and 11 to universities ranked in the top 21 academically.

The big Maryland clubs did well too, of course, but the Cap Blue 2025 recruiting class is as good or better than any in the country. I explain this case, not to convince the PP, who is beyond rational engagement or help, but for the sincere folks who read this thread trying to understand the lacrosse landscape.

One more bone of contention: there are several standouts on Pride. Maybe not yet at the level of the big 3 middies at Coppermine, the top middie at Hero's, or a couple players at M&D and Eagle Stix, but very good players, who will get recruited to great schools and do quite well. Come back and check this post in 3 years.

Lastly, I hope the good players and kids beyond the top 3-4 at Coppermine, or 1-2 at Crush or at MDU get good looks in the recruiting process. Those programs don't have the recruiting track records of Hero's or M&D, or Capital, for that matter.

Good post

Just to point out the 2027 teams in DC area had both a Pride team in the teens and a BLC team in top 10 annually all middle school years. The 2028s aren’t close to having this feed for Capital.

Good post. Stars folks, looking at you here.

[Anonymous]

Wearing a helmet should be required for posting on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just read the last few pages after not having been on here for a week or so and I am so sorry I did. Migraine the size of Montana. I actually came on to see what people thought about girls wearing helmets and I got caught up in this sh*tstorm.

I have had a number of conversations with experts on this. Former D1 players who now coach are pretty universally against helmets. They say it increases reckless play, leading with the head on dodges, aggressive defense through the stick, and erodes the rule-based safety (shooting space; checking rules, etc) that keep the game safe and playable.

That rings true to me. While I don't want to take away the option for a girl recovering from concussion or another injury where a helmet is required for protection, I would prefer that the rules maintain the norm of no helmets for girls and women's lacrosse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read the last few pages after not having been on here for a week or so and I am so sorry I did. Migraine the size of Montana. I actually came on to see what people thought about girls wearing helmets and I got caught up in this sh*tstorm.

I have had a number of conversations with experts on this. Former D1 players who now coach are pretty universally against helmets. They say it increases reckless play, leading with the head on dodges, aggressive defense through the stick, and erodes the rule-based safety (shooting space; checking rules, etc) that keep the game safe and playable.

That rings true to me. While I don't want to take away the option for a girl recovering from concussion or another injury where a helmet is required for protection, I would prefer that the rules maintain the norm of no helmets for girls and women's lacrosse.

This makes a lot of sense. Would like to see them prohibited.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read the last few pages after not having been on here for a week or so and I am so sorry I did. Migraine the size of Montana. I actually came on to see what people thought about girls wearing helmets and I got caught up in this sh*tstorm.

I have had a number of conversations with experts on this. Former D1 players who now coach are pretty universally against helmets. They say it increases reckless play, leading with the head on dodges, aggressive defense through the stick, and erodes the rule-based safety (shooting space; checking rules, etc) that keep the game safe and playable.

That rings true to me. While I don't want to take away the option for a girl recovering from concussion or another injury where a helmet is required for protection, I would prefer that the rules maintain the norm of no helmets for girls and women's lacrosse.

I agree. Subjectively, I have noticed players with helmets do tend to be more reckless. I have noticed the leading with the head as well. I also think it is interesting to note that many FL girls, where it is mandatory, don't wear them for club.

They are also significantly more expensive than goggles, which puts others at a disadvantage financially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read the last few pages after not having been on here for a week or so and I am so sorry I did. Migraine the size of Montana. I actually came on to see what people thought about girls wearing helmets and I got caught up in this sh*tstorm.

I have had a number of conversations with experts on this. Former D1 players who now coach are pretty universally against helmets. They say it increases reckless play, leading with the head on dodges, aggressive defense through the stick, and erodes the rule-based safety (shooting space; checking rules, etc) that keep the game safe and playable.

That rings true to me. While I don't want to take away the option for a girl recovering from concussion or another injury where a helmet is required for protection, I would prefer that the rules maintain the norm of no helmets for girls and women's lacrosse.

I agree. Subjectively, I have noticed players with helmets do tend to be more reckless. I have noticed the leading with the head as well. I also think it is interesting to note that many FL girls, where it is mandatory, don't wear them for club.

They are also significantly more expensive than goggles, which puts others at a disadvantage financially.

The refs should better enforce the rules. The sentiment supporting helmets comes from parents whose kids are frequently hit in the head without any consequences to the offending players. I can’t blame them for feeling this way but it’s a result of poor officiating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's something for everyone:

Baltimore peeps, you have an extremely high concentration of good lacrosse players in your 20 mile radius. No other area of the country can touch you. Congrats!

DC peeps, you have an extremely high concentration of intelligent people in your 20 mile radius. Seven of the ten most educated counties in the US are in the DC area. Cheers to that!

With that in mind, it should not be surprising to anyone that in any given recruiting class you would expect to see more commits from MD than DC, but the ones from DC would be smarter on average than the ones from Baltimore.

You clearly don’t much about Baltimore or Maryland in general. A lot of the MD parents I know are wealthier than the VA parents with fake wealth. Not only that but I believe there are more privates in the Baltimore region and they arguably place better in college admissions than DC area schools.

People need to get out of the DC bubble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's something for everyone:

Baltimore peeps, you have an extremely high concentration of good lacrosse players in your 20 mile radius. No other area of the country can touch you. Congrats!

DC peeps, you have an extremely high concentration of intelligent people in your 20 mile radius. Seven of the ten most educated counties in the US are in the DC area. Cheers to that!

With that in mind, it should not be surprising to anyone that in any given recruiting class you would expect to see more commits from MD than DC, but the ones from DC would be smarter on average than the ones from Baltimore.

You clearly don’t much about Baltimore or Maryland in general. A lot of the MD parents I know are wealthier than the VA parents with fake wealth. Not only that but I believe there are more privates in the Baltimore region and they arguably place better in college admissions than DC area schools.

People need to get out of the DC bubble.

Shhhh, Pride and Stars backers can't hear that!

[Anonymous]

Would be nice to move on from the MD/VA back and forth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would be nice to move on from the MD/VA back and forth.

We didn’t start the fire…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would be nice to move on from the MD/VA back and forth.

I agree. We need more Idaho lax talk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would be nice to move on from the MD/VA back and forth.

I agree. We need more Idaho lax talk.

Sadly, everything devolves into a we are better than you and there never seems to be interesting conversation. I liked the Data Guy stuff but then people start taking things so personally. Is it this bad on the other boards?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would be nice to move on from the MD/VA back and forth.

I agree. We need more Idaho lax talk.

Sadly, everything devolves into a we are better than you and there never seems to be interesting conversation. I liked the Data Guy stuff but then people start taking things so personally. Is it this bad on the other boards?

2028 thread has the special tendency to devolve to that nonsense, but there also a group that's serious about talking lacrosse, and even sharing helpful information. It's like two different conversations. We can go down the rabbit hole when the well-meaning folks get involved in responding to the personal stuff, at least half of which is just trolling.

So hang in there and engage on the content you are interested in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would be nice to move on from the MD/VA back and forth.

I agree. We need more Idaho lax talk.

Sadly, everything devolves into a we are better than you and there never seems to be interesting conversation. I liked the Data Guy stuff but then people start taking things so personally. Is it this bad on the other boards?

I’d say engage on the interesting topics and try to avoid the troll posts. They will eventually tire of being ignored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would be nice to move on from the MD/VA back and forth.

I agree. We need more Idaho lax talk.

Sadly, everything devolves into a we are better than you and there never seems to be interesting conversation. I liked the Data Guy stuff but then people start taking things so personally. Is it this bad on the other boards?

2028 thread has the special tendency to devolve to that nonsense, but there also a group that's serious about talking lacrosse, and even sharing helpful information. It's like two different conversations. We can go down the rabbit hole when the well-meaning folks get involved in responding to the personal stuff, at least half of which is just trolling.

So hang in there and engage on the content you are interested in.

13:30 here. You said it better than I did.