Feedback on VLC Club Lacrosse?

[Anonymous]

Not sure how this turned into a bash True discussion.

VLC has/had great brand recognition and as a previous poster stated could get into some high level tournaments that other clubs couldn't due to their affiliation with Crabs.

A good group of parents and players tried really hard to make the younger age groups work. They weren't making unreasonable demands of the club. They just wanted clarity and communication.

Admittedly, there were a small group of parents with unrealistic expectations. Unfortunately, they created a negative atmosphere the other parents tried to correct. Ultimately, the toxic group left mid-season. Unfortunately that left teams short handed, and the club did little to help with the situation. Despite that, the remaining parents worked hard to keep the teams competitive. But, when it came to tryout season, what were they going to do? Stay with a perceived sinking ship?

You state True is sub-par against VLC. But if VLC doesn't offer a competitive product, where should the players go? As you stated, MadLax is a disaster in its own way. Top Caliber is a good program, but with an extreme focus on Robinson/Madison. So what other options are there? Hammers? St James? While there are often comments that the youth club lacrosse market is oversaturated with teams, there really aren't a lot of options in Northern Virginia unless you want to spend your evenings driving in rush hour traffic to MD to try for Next Level or DC Express / Bethesda.

So to the poster stating that True is not the solution (at least for this year with the impacted age groups)...what is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who is the director?

The director is from CAVS. I do miss the older management from VLC before the CAVS merger....

For anyone is looking for a 2027 or 2028 team, I do not think VLC will be that team this year.

[Anonymous]

Our son has played with True since it started. The coach for 28 was the same 28 coach from the Nova select program they acquired. He’s still a coach but bc he’s a dad he’s now an assistant. The 27’s have the same coach this year as last year. The 29’s have had the same coach the entire time True VA has been a program. Pretty consistent coaching for their A teams…

[Anonymous]

If you want your kid to be recruited at high level lacrosse program for college, they must be on the elite team.

Used to be true but not so much any more. Now the player can use social media to market himself - sending video clips directly to coaching staff - and you don't have to rely on being the kid that college coaches hopefully notice among hundreds of other players at some tournament on a stinking hot day in July.

[Anonymous]

Coaches want to see players in person against high-level competition. A video may catch a coach’s attention, but it’s also a highlight reel of best plays. It doesn’t include bad plays or how a player adjusts to making that bad play. Coaches observe all the little things at live games, not social media.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If you want your kid to be recruited at high level lacrosse program for college, they must be on the elite team.

Used to be true but not so much any more. Now the player can use social media to market himself - sending video clips directly to coaching staff - and you don't have to rely on being the kid that college coaches hopefully notice among hundreds of other players at some tournament on a stinking hot day in July.

Sorry facts do not align with your post. Look at last three recruiting classes just about all of the D1 committed players played for a top club that went to those events.

[Anonymous]

Its all team based, not club based. And VLC looks like is ok with losing high level youth players in the hopes that they come back when it actually matters. Feels like a miscalculation based on how other successful teams that span youth and recruiting age operate. They appear to have alienated the youth families with players on a high level track in the local market. Haven’t been paying attention long enough to know if it matters but it certainly sucks for local youth athletes that do want to play in the NLF tournaments. Maybe those tournaments are shifting to the 3step owned operations anyway

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its all team based, not club based. And VLC looks like is ok with losing high level youth players in the hopes that they come back when it actually matters. Feels like a miscalculation based on how other successful teams that span youth and recruiting age operate. They appear to have alienated the youth families with players on a high level track in the local market. Haven’t been paying attention long enough to know if it matters but it certainly sucks for local youth athletes that do want to play in the NLF tournaments. Maybe those tournaments are shifting to the 3step owned operations anyway

Any information on the 2027 team?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If you want your kid to be recruited at high level lacrosse program for college, they must be on the elite team.

Used to be true but not so much any more. Now the player can use social media to market himself - sending video clips directly to coaching staff - and you don't have to rely on being the kid that college coaches hopefully notice among hundreds of other players at some tournament on a stinking hot day in July.

Sorry facts do not align with your post. Look at last three recruiting classes just about all of the D1 committed players played for a top club that went to those events.

Be honest. How many D1 players are there really? I know in DCUM land everyone thinks their kid is the next best thing to happen to lacrosse and they will have their pick between Maryland, Virginia, Syracuse, Hopkins, Penn State, etc.

But if you are realistic about the lacrosse landscape, those players are few and far between, even in the mid-Atlantic hotbed. There are plenty of opportunities to play lacrosse at the collegiate level from MCLA, NAIA, as well as D3, D2, and "non-traditional power" D1 schools. And those rosters are full of players that didn't play at the "hot" clubs.

Hopefully VLC will make a comeback at the 27, 28, and 29 age groups. It is a good club. But it isn't the only option to get play and get recruited.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If you want your kid to be recruited at high level lacrosse program for college, they must be on the elite team.

Used to be true but not so much any more. Now the player can use social media to market himself - sending video clips directly to coaching staff - and you don't have to rely on being the kid that college coaches hopefully notice among hundreds of other players at some tournament on a stinking hot day in July.

Sorry facts do not align with your post. Look at last three recruiting classes just about all of the D1 committed players played for a top club that went to those events.

Be honest. How many D1 players are there really? I know in DCUM land everyone thinks their kid is the next best thing to happen to lacrosse and they will have their pick between Maryland, Virginia, Syracuse, Hopkins, Penn State, etc.

But if you are realistic about the lacrosse landscape, those players are few and far between, even in the mid-Atlantic hotbed. There are plenty of opportunities to play lacrosse at the collegiate level from MCLA, NAIA, as well as D3, D2, and "non-traditional power" D1 schools. And those rosters are full of players that didn't play at the "hot" clubs.

Hopefully VLC will make a comeback at the 27, 28, and 29 age groups. It is a good club. But it isn't the only option to get play and get recruited.

The stats say just under 2.9% of HS lacrosse players are picked by D1 teams so yes you are correct it is a rare player however the top clubs in the area average about 7 players per year to top 30-40 D1 teams.

[Anonymous]

And the second tier clubs average around 0 players per year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And the second tier clubs average around 0 players per year.

VLC is a second tier club and they still manage to get some D1 commits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the second tier clubs average around 0 players per year.

VLC is a second tier club and they still manage to get some D1 commits.

It varies by team. For instance the 2024 and 2026 VLC teams are on track to have the average number (7) of D1 players, if not more. If they don’t get their act together in the younger classes, zero sounds about right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the second tier clubs average around 0 players per year.

VLC is a second tier club and they still manage to get some D1 commits.

It varies by team. For instance the 2024 and 2026 VLC teams are on track to have the average number (7) of D1 players, if not more. If they don’t get their act together in the younger classes, zero sounds about right.

I was hoping Dico coaching the 2028 team would help, but I am guessing parents were so fed up with management it didn't matter...

[Anonymous]

I think the lesson here is that if you have a youth player that is elite your choices are NL, BLC/DCE or madlax. If you have a youth player who is not elite your best bet in NOVA is True with TC or Hammers being a good second option. It sounds like the VLC youth teams are not a great option with multiple teams blowing up every year. Did I get that right?