2025 Girls Lax WCAC ISL Outlook

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter’s team played Potomac this year and they were clearly a good team with some great players but they also clearly lacked depth. I believe their play improved as the season progressed which is usually an indicator of decent coaching.

They have more depth than one would think. Coach just refuses to play anybody other than her favorites. And even when she does, to give starters a little break, she is sure they get nowhere near the ball. She has never developed the strong athletes that weren’t Capital or Pride A team players. Meanwhile, Visi, stone ridge, SJC, are playing girls who don’t even play outside of school and blowing everyone away. Coaching is more important than the players.

I'm sure I saw you on the sidelines at games, but I disagree. The people who didn't play were terrible.

Most ISL teams would beat mid level D1 programs. It’s not the coaches job to develop your kid from scratch. These teams are all very good. Do the work in the off season and let your child’s effort dictate their playing time.

Potomac is losing one senior and has more girls incoming. Get your kid the opportunities to improve so she earns her spot. Instead of spending time complaining on here get her to a trainer, a wall or HB to start. You can’t want it more than your kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The continued narratives suggesting that somehow SJC and Potomac, which both had great seasons, could have been even better if they just played their "depth," are transparently self-serving.
We get it. Your daughter doesn't play for a top club, but is a good athlete, and you think she should get more PT. "Coach only plays her favorites". She has 12 favorites?? Plus the subs she does make? Come on.
The reality is that there are only two DC-area teams with true "depth": Good Counsel and Stone Ridge.
Bottom line, the Potomac and SJC coaches, around the game their whole lives, accomplished college athletes, and awesome people--who see these girls every day in pratice--have much better judgment on who can help on the field than a biased parent.

+1

I think parents need to get a grip and stop attacking coaches on an anonymous message board.

[Anonymous]

Remember these are the same folks who think "most ISL teams would beat mid level D1 programs". So #4 in the ISL Potomac could beat #95 (of 127) William Mary? Delusional thinking. Coaches don't stand a chance with these families. And we can only imagine what their club lacrosse experience is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Remember these are the same folks who think "most ISL teams would beat mid level D1 programs". So #4 in the ISL Potomac could beat #95 (of 127) William Mary? Delusional thinking. Coaches don't stand a chance with these families. And we can only imagine what their club lacrosse experience is.

Truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember these are the same folks who think "most ISL teams would beat mid level D1 programs". So #4 in the ISL Potomac could beat #95 (of 127) William Mary? Delusional thinking. Coaches don't stand a chance with these families. And we can only imagine what their club lacrosse experience is.

Truth.

Totally agree, delusional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter’s team played Potomac this year and they were clearly a good team with some great players but they also clearly lacked depth. I believe their play improved as the season progressed which is usually an indicator of decent coaching.

They have more depth than one would think. Coach just refuses to play anybody other than her favorites. And even when she does, to give starters a little break, she is sure they get nowhere near the ball. She has never developed the strong athletes that weren’t Capital or Pride A team players. Meanwhile, Visi, stone ridge, SJC, are playing girls who don’t even play outside of school and blowing everyone away. Coaching is more important than the players.

I'm sure I saw you on the sidelines at games, but I disagree. The people who didn't play were terrible.

Most ISL teams would beat mid level D1 programs. It’s not the coaches job to develop your kid from scratch. These teams are all very good. Do the work in the off season and let your child’s effort dictate their playing time.

Potomac is losing one senior and has more girls incoming. Get your kid the opportunities to improve so she earns her spot. Instead of spending time complaining on here get her to a trainer, a wall or HB to start. You can’t want it more than your kid.

Put down the crack pipe. The top half of ISL AA is a very strong HS league, but by no means the best. There isn't a single HS program in the country that would stand a chance against a credible college program much less a mid-level D1 program.

[Anonymous]

Adding to the above: A mid-level competitive college club team would likely beat Visi/SR/SSSAS by 5 to 10 and anyone else in the ISL by 10 to 20, if the college girls don't take their feet off the gas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sarah Walsh is a great coach. She took Maret from the lower ISL division to the upper division in 2 seasons. Imagine what she could do at a Potomac or St. John’s.

Let’s see if Maret stays in the upper division after next season. They’ll most likely get relegated back to the lower division after getting smoked by the top teams next spring

It will be between EHS and Maret. EHS plays reallly rough bc they don't have the lax skills.

You misspelled "dirty". (You also misspelled "really").

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Adding to the above: A mid-level competitive college club team would likely beat Visi/SR/SSSAS by 5 to 10 and anyone else in the ISL by 10 to 20, if the college girls don't take their feet off the gas.

I basically agree with these points. Some delusional expectations--mostly related to misunderstanding depth again, not to mention the benefit of development of another 3-4 years physically and lacrosse-wise.

I will say, however, that having seen them in person and watched a lot of D1 lacrosse, this year's Good Counsel team would beat the Woffords or Longwoods, and wouldn't have embarrassed themselves against a William & Mary or 50-75 ranked team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The continued narratives suggesting that somehow SJC and Potomac, which both had great seasons, could have been even better if they just played their "depth," are transparently self-serving.
We get it. Your daughter doesn't play for a top club, but is a good athlete, and you think she should get more PT. "Coach only plays her favorites". She has 12 favorites?? Plus the subs she does make? Come on.
The reality is that there are only two DC-area teams with true "depth": Good Counsel and Stone Ridge.
Bottom line, the Potomac and SJC coaches, around the game their whole lives, accomplished college athletes, and awesome people--who see these girls every day in pratice--have much better judgment on who can help on the field than a biased parent.

+1

I think parents need to get a grip and stop attacking coaches on an anonymous message board.

Then maybe the coach could stop "attacking" our kids on the sidelines and in the hallways when complaining to their family members who also work in the school about players and their parents for many other students to hear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The continued narratives suggesting that somehow SJC and Potomac, which both had great seasons, could have been even better if they just played their "depth," are transparently self-serving.
We get it. Your daughter doesn't play for a top club, but is a good athlete, and you think she should get more PT. "Coach only plays her favorites". She has 12 favorites?? Plus the subs she does make? Come on.
The reality is that there are only two DC-area teams with true "depth": Good Counsel and Stone Ridge.
Bottom line, the Potomac and SJC coaches, around the game their whole lives, accomplished college athletes, and awesome people--who see these girls every day in pratice--have much better judgment on who can help on the field than a biased parent.

+1

I think parents need to get a grip and stop attacking coaches on an anonymous message board.

Then maybe the coach could stop "attacking" our kids on the sidelines and in the hallways when complaining to their family members who also work in the school about players and their parents for many other students to hear.

You probably should have read that one out loud before submitting. I can't stand the grammar police but your post is indecipherable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The continued narratives suggesting that somehow SJC and Potomac, which both had great seasons, could have been even better if they just played their "depth," are transparently self-serving.
We get it. Your daughter doesn't play for a top club, but is a good athlete, and you think she should get more PT. "Coach only plays her favorites". She has 12 favorites?? Plus the subs she does make? Come on.
The reality is that there are only two DC-area teams with true "depth": Good Counsel and Stone Ridge.
Bottom line, the Potomac and SJC coaches, around the game their whole lives, accomplished college athletes, and awesome people--who see these girls every day in pratice--have much better judgment on who can help on the field than a biased parent.

+1

I think parents need to get a grip and stop attacking coaches on an anonymous message board.

Then maybe the coach could stop "attacking" our kids on the sidelines and in the hallways when complaining to their family members who also work in the school about players and their parents for many other students to hear.

You probably should have read that one out loud before submitting. I can't stand the grammar police but your post is indecipherable.

There's no grammar mistakes in there, so you're probably smart not to police about it. It could use a comma to set off the clause modifying the family member, but it's not technically wrong. Do you know what a modifier is?

[Anonymous]

Which school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The continued narratives suggesting that somehow SJC and Potomac, which both had great seasons, could have been even better if they just played their "depth," are transparently self-serving.
We get it. Your daughter doesn't play for a top club, but is a good athlete, and you think she should get more PT. "Coach only plays her favorites". She has 12 favorites?? Plus the subs she does make? Come on.
The reality is that there are only two DC-area teams with true "depth": Good Counsel and Stone Ridge.
Bottom line, the Potomac and SJC coaches, around the game their whole lives, accomplished college athletes, and awesome people--who see these girls every day in pratice--have much better judgment on who can help on the field than a biased parent.

+1

I think parents need to get a grip and stop attacking coaches on an anonymous message board.

Then maybe the coach could stop "attacking" our kids on the sidelines and in the hallways when complaining to their family members who also work in the school about players and their parents for many other students to hear.

You probably should have read that one out loud before submitting. I can't stand the grammar police but your post is indecipherable.

There's no grammar mistakes in there, so you're probably smart not to police about it. It could use a comma to set off the clause modifying the family member, but it's not technically wrong. Do you know what a modifier is?

That's pretty fancy talk but I would try reading it out loud. It makes zero sense and is a 7-line run-on sentence. Plus, it reaks of A-hole dad whos kid is probably more athletic then him but not good enough to get in the field. May God have mercy on your soul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The continued narratives suggesting that somehow SJC and Potomac, which both had great seasons, could have been even better if they just played their "depth," are transparently self-serving.
We get it. Your daughter doesn't play for a top club, but is a good athlete, and you think she should get more PT. "Coach only plays her favorites". She has 12 favorites?? Plus the subs she does make? Come on.
The reality is that there are only two DC-area teams with true "depth": Good Counsel and Stone Ridge.
Bottom line, the Potomac and SJC coaches, around the game their whole lives, accomplished college athletes, and awesome people--who see these girls every day in pratice--have much better judgment on who can help on the field than a biased parent.

+1

I think parents need to get a grip and stop attacking coaches on an anonymous message board.

Then maybe the coach could stop "attacking" our kids on the sidelines and in the hallways when complaining to their family members who also work in the school about players and their parents for many other students to hear.

You probably should have read that one out loud before submitting. I can't stand the grammar police but your post is indecipherable.

There's no grammar mistakes in there, so you're probably smart not to police about it. It could use a comma to set off the clause modifying the family member, but it's not technically wrong. Do you know what a modifier is?

That's pretty fancy talk but I would try reading it out loud. It makes zero sense and is a 7-line run-on sentence. Plus, it reaks of A-hole dad whos kid is probably more athletic then him but not good enough to get in the field. May God have mercy on your soul.

If you’re going to play grammar police at least abide by your own rules. Try “whose” and “than” next time.