VHSL 2026 Girls Lacrosse

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
From my experience, it really is all about the clubs the players are on not the high school teams. College coaches recruit at tournaments and showcases not high school games. I don’t see much value in transferring to a private school unless the parents view it as a better education. Seems like we have some private school parents here on the public school board talking trash. I hope you are enjoying the long commute to private school for the rare possibility that your kid plays for a top D1 program. There arent a ton of top d1 recruits for dc area private schools either beyond SSSA.

Agree the high school - whether private or public is less important than club. However, because the competition is so much better in the privates the kids become much better. Iron sharpens iron. Kids don’t get better beating other bad public schools by 15+ every game.

I did a quick search of the rosters of the top ranked teams from last season to see how many Virginia girls are on those rosters and whether they attended public or private schools. I also did the three highest ranked teams in the Northern Virginia area. Here is what I found:

1) Northwestern - 0
2) UNC - 1 (Stone Ridge (private))
3) Maryland - 0
4) Johns Hopkins - 3 (St Stephens (private), Georgetown Visi (private), Meridian (public))
5) Colorado - 1 (Stafford (public))
6) Navy - 3 (St. Stephens (private), St. Annes Belfield (private), Meridian (public))
7) Stoney Brook - 0
8) Syracuse - 1 (St. Annes Belfied (private))
9) Michigan - 4 (Potomac School (private), Georgetown Visi (private), St. Annes Belfield (private), Chantilly (public))
10) Stanford - 0

13 Total (9 private, 4 public)

15) JMU - 6 (Oakton (public), Douglas Freeman (public), Woodson (public), Atlee (public), Madison (public), Kettle Run (public))
21) UVA - 6 (St Annes Belfield (2) (private), St Stephens (2) (private), Covenant (private), Western Albemarle (public))
27) Georgetown - 2 (Collegiate (private), Dominion (public))

14 total (8 public/6 private)

I don't know if this is super scientific but I think it reiterates the point that if you can play and are athletic enough, they will find you.

And I bet these girls all came from a few of the most elite clubs (Capital, M&D etc) whether they went to public or private school. The club is what really matters.

Actually, they didn't. This is about top lacrosse schools, not top USNWR schools. Folks are putting together information about public and private schooling, there's no need to make every thread about Caiptal on here.

Why so much hate on Capital? We should be building them up to continue with a great platform as a way for the girls to compete at the highest levels. But it's also a fact, they did come from the elite teams in the area. Perfect example, just take a look at the State POY commitment this year compared to the 2027 M&D and Capitals commitments. Even their second teams are very very competitive schools. You be the judge:

For the love of god, can you Capital sycophants contain your posts to all the Capital threads you've created? One of your gal pals posted attempting to co-op a public vs private conversation in a VHSL thread that quote "all" recruits were from Capital yada in Virginia, so Capital yada is all that matters. And it was from a list curated from top college teams. Not your own list. She lied. Many or maybe most are not from top clubs Capital and M&D.

Please post your copy and paste Capital lists on Capital threads and leave the VHSL thread alone.

I’ve read this several times and still can’t make sense of it.

LOL Me too! I think the technical term for it is Capital Derangement Syndrome (CDS). Symptoms are triggered nervous system (shivers, cold sweats, incoherent thoughts) along with some Coprolalia. hahaha

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Capital recruits are choosing the much better academic schools over the best lax schools. A wise choice in the long run. There is life after lax.

Yes, wise of them and their family. As some noted, many of the families use lacrosse as a pathway to their overall goal and NOT the end state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Capital recruits are choosing the much better academic schools over the best lax schools. A wise choice in the long run. There is life after lax.

Yes, wise of them and their family. As some noted, many of the families use lacrosse as a pathway to their overall goal and NOT the end state.

If you can’t get in on intellect, get in on athletics.

[Anonymous]

At some stage, all of our daughters will walk away from Lax. It important that they do it on their terms and have no regrets.

[Anonymous]

Moving on... Any thoughts on all state selections or when the meeting will be?

[Anonymous]

My top 5 in no particular order 26-27 season.

Mad
BF
YT
WF
?

Madison BF rematch for title.

[Anonymous]

This was just shared from another thread. Good to know for parents of 2028s and later...

---
"Our Criteria

On one hand, it’s quite simple:
- Athleticism
- Skills required at your position
- Lacrosse IQ
- Intangibles
- Size
- Toughness
- Stick skills
- Productivity

On the other hand, all of our scouts place slightly different levels of value on each of those categories.

Most importantly, though, players are ranked on their potential as college prospects. The rankings are not based on performance in high school.

If a player is more athletic, taller, or larger, that will compensate for current skill deficiencies. There’s the old adage that you cannot teach size and skill. If you go down the different levels of college athletics, the difference is very rarely in skill level. The biggest gaps are in size, explosiveness, and athleticism.

This distinction between high school production versus collegiate potential is a huge distinction and where we see parents and players get hung up the most. There are countless All-State players who end up as Division III recruits, while late-bloomers who barely play until their senior year become consensus Division I prospects.

College recruiters and Prep Girls Lacrosse scouts are looking for plays and flashes of athleticism that translate to the college game. Sometimes a high school player may only make a few plays in a game that wind up in the stat sheet. But if there are one or two displays of extraordinary athletic burst during the contest, there’s a difference in the way those are evaluated that is reflected in our rankings.

Some scouts may value high school production and stats more than others, and that’s absolutely allowed. It is a skill to compete and produce. At the same time, players need to be able to compete athletically and match up in size against your competition. The bar for athleticism and size continues to rise with the collegiate level. In order to be productive in college, you’ll need the requisite athleticism and size, whereas skills can be taught. So those differences, again, are reflected in our rankings. "

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
From my experience, it really is all about the clubs the players are on not the high school teams. College coaches recruit at tournaments and showcases not high school games. I don’t see much value in transferring to a private school unless the parents view it as a better education. Seems like we have some private school parents here on the public school board talking trash. I hope you are enjoying the long commute to private school for the rare possibility that your kid plays for a top D1 program. There arent a ton of top d1 recruits for dc area private schools either beyond SSSA.

Agree the high school - whether private or public is less important than club. However, because the competition is so much better in the privates the kids become much better. Iron sharpens iron. Kids don’t get better beating other bad public schools by 15+ every game.

I did a quick search of the rosters of the top ranked teams from last season to see how many Virginia girls are on those rosters and whether they attended public or private schools. I also did the three highest ranked teams in the Northern Virginia area. Here is what I found:

1) Northwestern - 0
2) UNC - 1 (Stone Ridge (private))
3) Maryland - 0
4) Johns Hopkins - 3 (St Stephens (private), Georgetown Visi (private), Meridian (public))
5) Colorado - 1 (Stafford (public))
6) Navy - 3 (St. Stephens (private), St. Annes Belfield (private), Meridian (public))
7) Stoney Brook - 0
8) Syracuse - 1 (St. Annes Belfied (private))
9) Michigan - 4 (Potomac School (private), Georgetown Visi (private), St. Annes Belfield (private), Chantilly (public))
10) Stanford - 0

13 Total (9 private, 4 public)

15) JMU - 6 (Oakton (public), Douglas Freeman (public), Woodson (public), Atlee (public), Madison (public), Kettle Run (public))
21) UVA - 6 (St Annes Belfield (2) (private), St Stephens (2) (private), Covenant (private), Western Albemarle (public))
27) Georgetown - 2 (Collegiate (private), Dominion (public))

14 total (8 public/6 private)

I don't know if this is super scientific but I think it reiterates the point that if you can play and are athletic enough, they will find you.

And I bet these girls all came from a few of the most elite clubs (Capital, M&D etc) whether they went to public or private school. The club is what really matters.

Actually, they didn't. This is about top lacrosse schools, not top USNWR schools. Folks are putting together information about public and private schooling, there's no need to make every thread about Caiptal on here.

Why so much hate on Capital? We should be building them up to continue with a great platform as a way for the girls to compete at the highest levels. But it's also a fact, they did come from the elite teams in the area. Perfect example, just take a look at the State POY commitment this year compared to the 2027 M&D and Capitals commitments. Even their second teams are very very competitive schools. You be the judge:

For the love of god, can you Capital sycophants contain your posts to all the Capital threads you've created? One of your gal pals posted attempting to co-op a public vs private conversation in a VHSL thread that quote "all" recruits were from Capital yada in Virginia, so Capital yada is all that matters. And it was from a list curated from top college teams. Not your own list. She lied. Many or maybe most are not from top clubs Capital and M&D.

Please post your copy and paste Capital lists on Capital threads and leave the VHSL thread alone.

I’ve read this several times and still can’t make sense of it.

LOL Me too! I think the technical term for it is Capital Derangement Syndrome (CDS). Symptoms are triggered nervous system (shivers, cold sweats, incoherent thoughts) along with some Coprolalia. hahaha

I think he just wants all of the Capital cheerleaders to stop trying to dominate every thread and making it about them. Sounds like a reasonable ask.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This was just shared from another thread. Good to know for parents of 2028s and later...

---
"Our Criteria

On one hand, it’s quite simple:
- Athleticism
- Skills required at your position
- Lacrosse IQ
- Intangibles
- Size
- Toughness
- Stick skills
- Productivity

On the other hand, all of our scouts place slightly different levels of value on each of those categories.

Most importantly, though, players are ranked on their potential as college prospects. The rankings are not based on performance in high school.

If a player is more athletic, taller, or larger, that will compensate for current skill deficiencies. There’s the old adage that you cannot teach size and skill. If you go down the different levels of college athletics, the difference is very rarely in skill level. The biggest gaps are in size, explosiveness, and athleticism.

This distinction between high school production versus collegiate potential is a huge distinction and where we see parents and players get hung up the most. There are countless All-State players who end up as Division III recruits, while late-bloomers who barely play until their senior year become consensus Division I prospects.

College recruiters and Prep Girls Lacrosse scouts are looking for plays and flashes of athleticism that translate to the college game. Sometimes a high school player may only make a few plays in a game that wind up in the stat sheet. But if there are one or two displays of extraordinary athletic burst during the contest, there’s a difference in the way those are evaluated that is reflected in our rankings.

Some scouts may value high school production and stats more than others, and that’s absolutely allowed. It is a skill to compete and produce. At the same time, players need to be able to compete athletically and match up in size against your competition. The bar for athleticism and size continues to rise with the collegiate level. In order to be productive in college, you’ll need the requisite athleticism and size, whereas skills can be taught. So those differences, again, are reflected in our rankings. "

For any recruit, the key question is not whether she is athletic in the abstract, but whether her athleticism fits the level of the program evaluating her. She does not need to be the best athlete in the area to find a program that matches her athletic profile.

[Anonymous]

Any updates on the all state team?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any updates on the all state team?

They are being Wednesday night. So, coaches will know tonight