2026 Private School Boys Lacrosse Commentary, Scores, and Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bullis is under recruited I expect to see some of their DIII commits move over to D1 this summer.

The D3 middie is one of the best in the area for sure. The goalie is lights out for three straight seasons and the attack is a little small but strong presence plays much bigger than his size, great field awareness and lax IQ

The team is really talented and makes me wish these coaches watched and recruited more form HS than club.

These kids can hang with anyone.

Bullis doesn’t have a D3 middie. Bullis has two A players (17 and 28) a bunch of B players and the rest who know their role. They only play 13 or 14 kids, which there is a lesson in for the other teams in the area.

NO B players. Team Players!

A – 2 (Dickinson)
A – 26 (Stevenson)
A – 27 (OWU)
M – 3 (Holy Cross)
M – 11 (Penn)
M – 28 (Penn)
SSDM - 17 (Navy)
SSDM – 0 (Hampton)
D – 43 (Navy)
D – 66 (Hampton)
D – 88 (Undecided)
LSM – 1 (St. Joes)
FOGO – (Uncommitted)
G – 6 (Dickinson)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess D1 commit isn’t good enough these days. Only Tewaaraton finalist for this guy.

D-1 commit? I’m not sure how impressed one ought to be with that.

First, there’s rarely any scholarship money since schools only have 12.6 to spread across 40 or so roster members. So these “commitments” are one-sided.

And there are now 75 colleges playing D-1 Lax. So that means there are 1,000 to 1,500 of these D1 “commits” playing high school lax as seniors and another big group who are Juniors.

Someone needs to keep up. No more lax scholarship limits.

Silly post. First less than 3% of all HS players go D1 it is always an high bar to achieve. Ivy teams have always been strong at lacrosse and never give athletic money. Playing at the highest level has 0 to do with how college is paid for.

The highest level?

The assumption here seems to be that any D1 program is better than any D3 program and that all the players on D1 rosters are better than all those on D3 rosters.

That's not true.

Serious D3 programs like those at the top of the NESCAC or local programs like Salisbury could easily compete with the bottom half of D1. And there are plenty of kids on D3 rosters that could play at D1 schools.

Some of these IAC commits are to D1 schools at the subterranean levels of D1 rankings.

Recruiting is a highly inexact science and based on what I have seen of what happens when they get to college, the IAC prospects are sometimes overvalued because of reputation and increased visibility.

[Anonymous]

Hmm so D1 is not the highest level?? No assumption was made about D3 had nothing to do with the previous statement about money. In fact it supports my point that many kids chose NESCAC schools with no money for lacrosse but great opportunity. The previous point was that a HS players commitment does not mean anything about their ability because there are fewer scholarships. That is a silly statement. But is sounds like you may have attended Salisbury so maybe your GPA was not great in HS. This is a HS thread any player committing to D1 or high level D3 is a strong player at the HS level. How much money they get for college lacrosse is irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Tufts and Bowdoin from the NESCAC would beat the bottom 3rd of D1 programs, and it's not even close.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tufts and Bowdoin from the NESCAC would beat the bottom 3rd of D1 programs, and it's not even close.

Picking nits, but out of the 77 D1 teams, Tufts and Bowdoin would only compete with the bottom 20 and beat the bottom 10.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bullis is under recruited I expect to see some of their DIII commits move over to D1 this summer.

The D3 middie is one of the best in the area for sure. The goalie is lights out for three straight seasons and the attack is a little small but strong presence plays much bigger than his size, great field awareness and lax IQ

The team is really talented and makes me wish these coaches watched and recruited more form HS than club.

These kids can hang with anyone.

Bullis doesn’t have a D3 middie. Bullis has two A players (17 and 28) a bunch of B players and the rest who know their role. They only play 13 or 14 kids, which there is a lesson in for the other teams in the area.

Underrated comment. At the high school level, maximizing the amount of time the best athletes / top players are on the field is good business, versus continuous substitution. If your LSM, SSDM, O Mid, FO is good, let him cook.

[Anonymous]

Mad Lax Team doing a live broadcast of the GP - Landon game this afternoon.

They are predicting a 11-9 victory for the Lil Hoyas. I'd be shocked if either team scores more than 9. I anticipate a low-scoring defensive battle.

Good luck to both teams; it should be a great evening for lacrosse!

Bears 8, Hoyas 7

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tufts and Bowdoin from the NESCAC would beat the bottom 3rd of D1 programs, and it's not even close.

Picking nits, but out of the 77 D1 teams, Tufts and Bowdoin would only compete with the bottom 20 and beat the bottom 10.

What your basis for saying that? My opinion is that the best D3 programs would compete well with D1s in the middle of the D1 pack. And that those who assume that all D1 recruits are better athletes/lacrosse players know very little about the college game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hmm so D1 is not the highest level?? No assumption was made about D3 had nothing to do with the previous statement about money. In fact it supports my point that many kids chose NESCAC schools with no money for lacrosse but great opportunity. The previous point was that a HS players commitment does not mean anything about their ability because there are fewer scholarships. That is a silly statement. But is sounds like you may have attended Salisbury so maybe your GPA was not great in HS. This is a HS thread any player committing to D1 or high level D3 is a strong player at the HS level. How much money they get for college lacrosse is irrelevant.

No, I didn’t go to Salisbury. But I know enough about college lacrosse to know they’ve had a strong program for years.

The point you fail to comprehend is that there is so little scholarship money available at D1 it’s rarely a driver for recruits as it might be in football.

That’s the reason that so many very good players opt to play at the D3 level.

When I read people on here assuming that any D1 opportunity is better than any D3 one I chalk that up as being nonsense.

Years of watching youth lacrosse, paying Club dues and watching these IAC teams haven’t helped them understand the college game. They are neophytes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bullis is under recruited I expect to see some of their DIII commits move over to D1 this summer.

The D3 middie is one of the best in the area for sure. The goalie is lights out for three straight seasons and the attack is a little small but strong presence plays much bigger than his size, great field awareness and lax IQ

The team is really talented and makes me wish these coaches watched and recruited more form HS than club.

These kids can hang with anyone.

Bullis doesn’t have a D3 middie. Bullis has two A players (17 and 28) a bunch of B players and the rest who know their role. They only play 13 or 14 kids, which there is a lesson in for the other teams in the area.

Underrated comment. At the high school level, maximizing the amount of time the best athletes / top players are on the field is good business, versus continuous substitution. If your LSM, SSDM, O Mid, FO is good, let him cook.

Agreed. 2 games a week. let them cook. if injury bug hits, you could be screwed. but that only happens occasionally. worth the risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tufts and Bowdoin from the NESCAC would beat the bottom 3rd of D1 programs, and it's not even close.

Picking nits, but out of the 77 D1 teams, Tufts and Bowdoin would only compete with the bottom 20 and beat the bottom 10.

What your basis for saying that? My opinion is that the best D3 programs would compete well with D1s in the middle of the D1 pack. And that those who assume that all D1 recruits are better athletes/lacrosse players know very little about the college game.

Hmm. Maybe not so much. This season has proven that middle of the pack D1 teams like Lehigh or Stony Brook Marist ect can knock off top teams but I think when they have played a W&L can knock off VMI or Tufts over Dartmouth but not over Harvard. Salisbury over Mount but not Navy. That is about the limit. Look at Hobart? They used to rule D3. Dont confuse teams with players many D3 players can and do excellent in D1 look at the ND Fogo. That is the better case.to be made.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bullis is under recruited I expect to see some of their DIII commits move over to D1 this summer.

The D3 middie is one of the best in the area for sure. The goalie is lights out for three straight seasons and the attack is a little small but strong presence plays much bigger than his size, great field awareness and lax IQ

The team is really talented and makes me wish these coaches watched and recruited more form HS than club.

These kids can hang with anyone.

Bullis doesn’t have a D3 middie. Bullis has two A players (17 and 28) a bunch of B players and the rest who know their role. They only play 13 or 14 kids, which there is a lesson in for the other teams in the area.

Underrated comment. At the high school level, maximizing the amount of time the best athletes / top players are on the field is good business, versus continuous substitution. If your LSM, SSDM, O Mid, FO is good, let him cook.

Agreed. 2 games a week. let them cook. if injury bug hits, you could be screwed. but that only happens occasionally. worth the risk.

Yes that is the counter for sure. Glad you mentioned it. More reward than risk, agree.