2026 Private School Boys Lacrosse Commentary, Scores, and Updates

[Anonymous]

Brunswick, Loomis, Deerfield should take down the top teams from the IAC and MIAA by 6+ goals when they are getting 4 - 8 PGs a year.


One of Landon's fogos from last season ended up at Loomis for a PG year and is headed to Penn this coming fall - I wouldn't call him an average player by any means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:. If you’re good, colleges would prefer a student takes a PG year to protect eligibility.

So this pretty much tells me you don't know what you are talking about because this isn't the current view on HS boys college recruiting. I've had several coaches and in the know people state that PG years are basically worthless unless the school tells you to take a PG year. The school tells a kid this not because the kid isn't good but to "fix" their numbers. Now, maybe this will happen more with the 48 roster limit but I kind of doubt it.

Most college D1 recruiting is basically completed before the winter of a players junior year. That is before most players have completed their 3rd year of HS lax. It thus pays dividends to be one year older than other kids. Whether you reclass in K, 6th grade (the Baltimore Public to Private school special) or repeat 9th grade going to a Deerfield or the like doesn't really matter but they aren't taking PG years.

Haha. Here we go! Another dad claiming he has insider info with “people in the know”. You’re probably one of those dads hanging on the sidelines with your arms crossed holding court. And by the way, the point you made is exactly what I was alluding to.

If colleges think your kid is that good but need to warehouse him until there’s space then they will tell you to PG to keep eligibility. This will become important with limited team sizes especially specialty positions.

My kid is in the process right now. Im well aware of the situation and specifically asked about PG.

Almost all said PG kids that dont have offers in hand in their junior year are unlikely.to be helped by a PG year after their senior year - its too late at that point. Reclassing to repeat a year like repeating their sophomore year at a PG school was more beneficial. Take that for what it is.

Dont hate on me hate the game and your lack of understanding in how hs lax kids are recruited.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:. If you’re good, colleges would prefer a student takes a PG year to protect eligibility.

So this pretty much tells me you don't know what you are talking about because this isn't the current view on HS boys college recruiting. I've had several coaches and in the know people state that PG years are basically worthless unless the school tells you to take a PG year. The school tells a kid this not because the kid isn't good but to "fix" their numbers. Now, maybe this will happen more with the 48 roster limit but I kind of doubt it.

Most college D1 recruiting is basically completed before the winter of a players junior year. That is before most players have completed their 3rd year of HS lax. It thus pays dividends to be one year older than other kids. Whether you reclass in K, 6th grade (the Baltimore Public to Private school special) or repeat 9th grade going to a Deerfield or the like doesn't really matter but they aren't taking PG years.

Haha. Here we go! Another dad claiming he has insider info with “people in the know”. You’re probably one of those dads hanging on the sidelines with your arms crossed holding court. And by the way, the point you made is exactly what I was alluding to.

If colleges think your kid is that good but need to warehouse him until there’s space then they will tell you to PG to keep eligibility. This will become important with limited team sizes especially specialty positions.

My kid is in the process right now. Im well aware of the situation and specifically asked about PG.

Almost all said PG kids that dont have offers in hand in their junior year are unlikely.to be helped by a PG year after their senior year - its too late at that point. Reclassing to repeat a year like repeating their sophomore year at a PG school was more beneficial. Take that for what it is.

Dont hate on me hate the game and your lack of understanding in how hs lax kids are recruited.

What D3 school is he looking at?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:. If you’re good, colleges would prefer a student takes a PG year to protect eligibility.

So this pretty much tells me you don't know what you are talking about because this isn't the current view on HS boys college recruiting. I've had several coaches and in the know people state that PG years are basically worthless unless the school tells you to take a PG year. The school tells a kid this not because the kid isn't good but to "fix" their numbers. Now, maybe this will happen more with the 48 roster limit but I kind of doubt it.

Most college D1 recruiting is basically completed before the winter of a players junior year. That is before most players have completed their 3rd year of HS lax. It thus pays dividends to be one year older than other kids. Whether you reclass in K, 6th grade (the Baltimore Public to Private school special) or repeat 9th grade going to a Deerfield or the like doesn't really matter but they aren't taking PG years.

Haha. Here we go! Another dad claiming he has insider info with “people in the know”. You’re probably one of those dads hanging on the sidelines with your arms crossed holding court. And by the way, the point you made is exactly what I was alluding to.

If colleges think your kid is that good but need to warehouse him until there’s space then they will tell you to PG to keep eligibility. This will become important with limited team sizes especially specialty positions.

My kid is in the process right now. Im well aware of the situation and specifically asked about PG.

Almost all said PG kids that dont have offers in hand in their junior year are unlikely.to be helped by a PG year after their senior year - its too late at that point. Reclassing to repeat a year like repeating their sophomore year at a PG school was more beneficial. Take that for what it is.

Dont hate on me hate the game and your lack of understanding in how hs lax kids are recruited.

wppoy pg'd and had offers from navy and chose syracuse. Landon top fogo in the mid atlantic pg and michigan and chose penn. There's just too many examples to ignore. Stop with the "I'm in the process" because you are getting bad knowledge. Being an 18 year old sophomore like the man at Culver or waiting for a single year are what the top d1 schools want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok - so because St. Anthony’s is soft, everyone should be?

There are always a couple of exceptions, but for the most part, most 19 and 20 year olds still playing high school are still playing high school because they’re not that great.

To be scared to play them is sad. Those 19 and 20 year olds are no more full grown than the 18 year olds on any other varsity team.

It’s not like middle school where you do get the huge size and athleticism disparities between pre and post pubescent kids of different ages.

Couldn’t agree more. Kids don’t reclass for high school because they’re at the top of their game. Those kids are asked to reclass because of academics, size, or lax development. The assumption that reclassing confers some magical power to a kid that makes him more competitive is a delusion. If you’re good, colleges would prefer a student takes a PG year to protect eligibility.

I see tons of reclasses out there that don’t elevate their game but rather fall down to the class they drop down to. Success is simple: innate ability+physical attributes+coachability+dedication/drive to be the best.

If what you say is true then why do D1’s shop the transfer portal isteaf of bringing in the 18 year old they can mold and coach for four years. Milliman admitted as much at JHU’s prospect day. Older is better because they have been doing it for longer in their grown up body and have 2-4 more tears in the weight room.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok - so because St. Anthony’s is soft, everyone should be?

There are always a couple of exceptions, but for the most part, most 19 and 20 year olds still playing high school are still playing high school because they’re not that great.

To be scared to play them is sad. Those 19 and 20 year olds are no more full grown than the 18 year olds on any other varsity team.

It’s not like middle school where you do get the huge size and athleticism disparities between pre and post pubescent kids of different ages.

Couldn’t agree more. Kids don’t reclass for high school because they’re at the top of their game. Those kids are asked to reclass because of academics, size, or lax development. The assumption that reclassing confers some magical power to a kid that makes him more competitive is a delusion. If you’re good, colleges would prefer a student takes a PG year to protect eligibility.

I see tons of reclasses out there that don’t elevate their game but rather fall down to the class they drop down to. Success is simple: innate ability+physical attributes+coachability+dedication/drive to be the best.

If what you say is true then why do D1’s shop the transfer portal isteaf of bringing in the 18 year old they can mold and coach for four years. Milliman admitted as much at JHU’s prospect day. Older is better because they have been doing it for longer in their grown up body and have 2-4 more tears in the weight room.

The presupposition is that the child is any good. Reclassing doesn’t magically change a no star/ 3 star into a 5 star. Reclassed kids still have to compete against the top players of the class they drop down to. I know two Ivy commits that are actually playing up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok - so because St. Anthony’s is soft, everyone should be?

There are always a couple of exceptions, but for the most part, most 19 and 20 year olds still playing high school are still playing high school because they’re not that great.

To be scared to play them is sad. Those 19 and 20 year olds are no more full grown than the 18 year olds on any other varsity team.

It’s not like middle school where you do get the huge size and athleticism disparities between pre and post pubescent kids of different ages.

Couldn’t agree more. Kids don’t reclass for high school because they’re at the top of their game. Those kids are asked to reclass because of academics, size, or lax development. The assumption that reclassing confers some magical power to a kid that makes him more competitive is a delusion. If you’re good, colleges would prefer a student takes a PG year to protect eligibility.

I see tons of reclasses out there that don’t elevate their game but rather fall down to the class they drop down to. Success is simple: innate ability+physical attributes+coachability+dedication/drive to be the best.

If what you say is true then why do D1’s shop the transfer portal isteaf of bringing in the 18 year old they can mold and coach for four years. Milliman admitted as much at JHU’s prospect day. Older is better because they have been doing it for longer in their grown up body and have 2-4 more tears in the weight room.

The presupposition is that the child is any good. Reclassing doesn’t magically change a no star/ 3 star into a 5 star. Reclassed kids still have to compete against the top players of the class they drop down to. I know two Ivy commits that are actually playing up.

Actually, it does change a 3 or no star into stars and ratings. This is because players are rated against the performance of others in the same class. Knowing 2 kids is miniscule against the amount of players who've purposefully reclassed down from 8th grade and older. MSM has picked up on it and is running a story about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok - so because St. Anthony’s is soft, everyone should be?

There are always a couple of exceptions, but for the most part, most 19 and 20 year olds still playing high school are still playing high school because they’re not that great.

To be scared to play them is sad. Those 19 and 20 year olds are no more full grown than the 18 year olds on any other varsity team.

It’s not like middle school where you do get the huge size and athleticism disparities between pre and post pubescent kids of different ages.

Couldn’t agree more. Kids don’t reclass for high school because they’re at the top of their game. Those kids are asked to reclass because of academics, size, or lax development. The assumption that reclassing confers some magical power to a kid that makes him more competitive is a delusion. If you’re good, colleges would prefer a student takes a PG year to protect eligibility.

I see tons of reclasses out there that don’t elevate their game but rather fall down to the class they drop down to. Success is simple: innate ability+physical attributes+coachability+dedication/drive to be the best.

If what you say is true then why do D1’s shop the transfer portal isteaf of bringing in the 18 year old they can mold and coach for four years. Milliman admitted as much at JHU’s prospect day. Older is better because they have been doing it for longer in their grown up body and have 2-4 more tears in the weight room.

They shop the portal because they can get a player who is a known quantity in college lacrosse. Evaluating high school kids is hard and there are a lot of misses.

[Anonymous]

Any noteworthy DMV or regional games to follow today or tomorrow?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok - so because St. Anthony’s is soft, everyone should be?

There are always a couple of exceptions, but for the most part, most 19 and 20 year olds still playing high school are still playing high school because they’re not that great.

To be scared to play them is sad. Those 19 and 20 year olds are no more full grown than the 18 year olds on any other varsity team.

It’s not like middle school where you do get the huge size and athleticism disparities between pre and post pubescent kids of different ages.

Couldn’t agree more. Kids don’t reclass for high school because they’re at the top of their game. Those kids are asked to reclass because of academics, size, or lax development. The assumption that reclassing confers some magical power to a kid that makes him more competitive is a delusion. If you’re good, colleges would prefer a student takes a PG year to protect eligibility.

I see tons of reclasses out there that don’t elevate their game but rather fall down to the class they drop down to. Success is simple: innate ability+physical attributes+coachability+dedication/drive to be the best.

If what you say is true then why do D1’s shop the transfer portal isteaf of bringing in the 18 year old they can mold and coach for four years. Milliman admitted as much at JHU’s prospect day. Older is better because they have been doing it for longer in their grown up body and have 2-4 more tears in the weight room.

The presupposition is that the child is any good. Reclassing doesn’t magically change a no star/ 3 star into a 5 star. Reclassed kids still have to compete against the top players of the class they drop down to. I know two Ivy commits that are actually playing up.

Actually, it does change a 3 or no star into stars and ratings. This is because players are rated against the performance of others in the same class. Knowing 2 kids is miniscule against the amount of players who've purposefully reclassed down from 8th grade and older. MSM has picked up on it and is running a story about it.

Again, the presupposition that a reclass is more competitive or can get higher ratings simply dropping down a grade would cause everyone to reclass and that’s not the case. In fact BIC is notoriously anti- reclass/play-up. Your argument that a mediocre player magically turns into a 5 star recruit is ridiculous. It’s the reclass trap that many fall into. Parents who reclass their kids think they’re clever like the poster above. Those asked to reclass shouldn’t necessarily wear it as a badge of honor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok - so because St. Anthony’s is soft, everyone should be?

There are always a couple of exceptions, but for the most part, most 19 and 20 year olds still playing high school are still playing high school because they’re not that great.

To be scared to play them is sad. Those 19 and 20 year olds are no more full grown than the 18 year olds on any other varsity team.

It’s not like middle school where you do get the huge size and athleticism disparities between pre and post pubescent kids of different ages.

Couldn’t agree more. Kids don’t reclass for high school because they’re at the top of their game. Those kids are asked to reclass because of academics, size, or lax development. The assumption that reclassing confers some magical power to a kid that makes him more competitive is a delusion. If you’re good, colleges would prefer a student takes a PG year to protect eligibility.

I see tons of reclasses out there that don’t elevate their game but rather fall down to the class they drop down to. Success is simple: innate ability+physical attributes+coachability+dedication/drive to be the best.

If what you say is true then why do D1’s shop the transfer portal isteaf of bringing in the 18 year old they can mold and coach for four years. Milliman admitted as much at JHU’s prospect day. Older is better because they have been doing it for longer in their grown up body and have 2-4 more tears in the weight room.

The presupposition is that the child is any good. Reclassing doesn’t magically change a no star/ 3 star into a 5 star. Reclassed kids still have to compete against the top players of the class they drop down to. I know two Ivy commits that are actually playing up.

Actually, it does change a 3 or no star into stars and ratings. This is because players are rated against the performance of others in the same class. Knowing 2 kids is miniscule against the amount of players who've purposefully reclassed down from 8th grade and older. MSM has picked up on it and is running a story about it.

Again, the presupposition that a reclass is more competitive or can get higher ratings simply dropping down a grade would cause everyone to reclass and that’s not the case. In fact BIC is notoriously anti- reclass/play-up. Your argument that a mediocre player magically turns into a 5 star recruit is ridiculous. It’s the reclass trap that many fall into. Parents who reclass their kids think they’re clever like the poster above. Those asked to reclass shouldn’t necessarily wear it as a badge of honor.

Reclassing especially in 8th grade is an admissions game. The numbers of slots available are greater going into freshman year than other years. One can couch it in athletic terms but the top 20 recruits would be top 20 independent of reclassing. Agreeing to reclass increases the probability of getting into the school of your choice.

[Anonymous]

A lot of games today. Where’s the spread guy?

[Anonymous]

Latest DMV Mad Lax Rankings:

1. SJC (3-1): loses to Culver by 10 goals but remains steady at #1

2. PVI (6-0): smokes EHS.

3. Bullis (6-0): holds big wins over Haverford and Spalding and a quality win over GC.

4. Landon (3-2): good win over GC, but loses to Culver in a dog fight

5. GP (4-1): Good bounce back win against St Chris from Richmond

6. GC (3-3): gives Landon all they can handle last week.

7. EHS (4-1): Kinda a joke, they are ranked this high when they have zero quality wins.

8. GZ (0-5): Eagles have played the hardest schedule in the area and it's not even close.

9. STA (4-4): good showing on their spring break trip in South Carolina.

10. The Heights (1-2): very suspect they are even ranked given who they have played.

Mad Lax guy must have a hard on for SJC as it makes little sense that they didn't drop after their Culver performance and even their LaSalle performance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Latest DMV Mad Lax Rankings:

1. SJC (3-1): loses to Culver by 10 goals but remains steady at #1

2. PVI (6-0): smokes EHS.

3. Bullis (6-0): holds big wins over Haverford and Spalding and a quality win over GC.

4. Landon (3-2): good win over GC, but loses to Culver in a dog fight

5. GP (4-1): Good bounce back win against St Chris from Richmond

6. GC (3-3): gives Landon all they can handle last week.

7. EHS (4-1): Kinda a joke, they are ranked this high when they have zero quality wins.

8. GZ (0-5): Eagles have played the hardest schedule in the area and it's not even close.

9. STA (4-4): good showing on their spring break trip in South Carolina.

10. The Heights (1-2): very suspect they are even ranked given who they have played.

Mad Lax guy must have a hard on for SJC as it makes little sense that they didn't drop after their Culver performance and even their LaSalle performance.

EHS persists at 7, 8 or 9 in those madlax rankings for the most obvious of nepo reasons. They play STAB this week. If they stay within 10, they will remain at 7. Accepting bets at 3:1.

[Anonymous]

PVI
Bullis
Gp
SJC
Landon
Gc
Sta
Ep
Potomac
Public. Madison, Robinson, urbana