STATS ON PLAYTIME OF FORMER Capital players in College?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Recapping D1 playing time for the Cap 2023s:

- Four on top 25 teams (UVA 2X, Harvard, Michigan) have played in all / nearly all games as sophomores, with two starting every game this year; two played in every game freshman year, with one starting in most (13/15)
- One at a top three team (Northwestern) has played in over 70 percent of games as a sophomore.
- One at Pitt has played in all 15 games as a sophomore with 8 starts.
- One at VCU played in all 18 games as a freshman (7 starts) and has started in 14 of 15 games as a sophomore.
- One at Colgate played in all 17 games as a freshman (16 starts), and started in all 13 games this year.
- One at St. Joe’s played in 11 games as a freshman and 10 games thus far as a sophomore
- One of the top 25 players made All-ACC as a freshman, another made All-Ivy as a freshman.
- Two made the Atlantic 10 All-Rookie team as freshmen

Definitive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Capital parent. Don’t care about the Web site or social media. Confidence whispers. Insecurity shouts.

It ain’t that deep lax peeps. Websites and social media are the norm and fun. I am sure at some point Capital will get with the times. Hopefully it is this year with their 2025 class!

[Anonymous]

Just throwing fuel on the fire...the only two women of recent times on both the IWLCA All American and Tewaaraton Watch Lists played on the same HS team and neither for Capital.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just throwing fuel on the fire...the only two women of recent times on both the IWLCA All American and Tewaaraton Watch Lists played on the same HS team and neither for Capital.

Irrelevant. The thread is about Capital player time in college and the false portrayal that they receive none. The PP’s stats speak for themselves.

[Anonymous]

The relative lack of success of Capital players at the college level is partly the result of Capital's "fair play" system. Dominant players get approximately the same playing time as less dominant players. That helps with the development and recruiting of the less dominant players. In other clubs the less dominant player would not get as much time or development. But, that system can also hurt the team (through less wins) and the more dominant players b.c the more dominate player might not get as much playing time or accolades, which can impact player rankings etc. Those player rankings then impact allocated scholarship money, and consequently playing opportunities at the college level. It only makes sense for college coaches to give more playing opportunities to the players with the higher scholarship amounts. As Capital's recruiting success bears out, the fair play system works very well at getting significant numbers of commits to D1 program. Its not as great at allowing the most dominate players to shine as brightly (as compared to other clubs) which can lead to more buzz, higher rankings, scholarships & consequently college opportunities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter is from Howard County and plays for Heroes and didn't get the GPA or SAT scores of Capital Kids that go to top schools. Therefore I am going to trash on Capital Recruit play time.

My daughter is from Arlington County and plays for Capital and got the best GPA and SAT scores to all her top schools. Therefore I watch as she got $0 in scholarship money and sit on the bench for 4 years. Just to protect the Capital recruiting image.

huzzah! Truth shall set you all free. Cap parents will never concede because they planned, manipulated, and spent loads of money living to impress someone else. For every one cap player that actually plays there are dozens who ride the pine and wonder how it ended up the way it did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The relative lack of success of Capital players at the college level is partly the result of Capital's "fair play" system. Dominant players get approximately the same playing time as less dominant players. That helps with the development and recruiting of the less dominant players. In other clubs the less dominant player would not get as much time or development. But, that system can also hurt the team (through less wins) and the more dominant players b.c the more dominate player might not get as much playing time or accolades, which can impact player rankings etc. Those player rankings then impact allocated scholarship money, and consequently playing opportunities at the college level. It only makes sense for college coaches to give more playing opportunities to the players with the higher scholarship amounts. As Capital's recruiting success bears out, the fair play system works very well at getting significant numbers of commits to D1 program. Its not as great at allowing the most dominate players to shine as brightly (as compared to other clubs) which can lead to more buzz, higher rankings, scholarships & consequently college opportunities.

You’re reading too many spy novels. Scroll back and look at the accolades and playing time of the 23s. Case made, case closed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter is from Howard County and plays for Heroes and didn't get the GPA or SAT scores of Capital Kids that go to top schools. Therefore I am going to trash on Capital Recruit play time.

My daughter is from Arlington County and plays for Capital and got the best GPA and SAT scores to all her top schools. Therefore I watch as she got $0 in scholarship money and sit on the bench for 4 years. Just to protect the Capital recruiting image.

huzzah! Truth shall set you all free. Cap parents will never concede because they planned, manipulated, and spent loads of money living to impress someone else. For every one cap player that actually plays there are dozens who ride the pine and wonder how it ended up the way it did.

What you will never understand is that we love your obsession with us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The relative lack of success of Capital players at the college level is partly the result of Capital's "fair play" system. Dominant players get approximately the same playing time as less dominant players. That helps with the development and recruiting of the less dominant players. In other clubs the less dominant player would not get as much time or development. But, that system can also hurt the team (through less wins) and the more dominant players b.c the more dominate player might not get as much playing time or accolades, which can impact player rankings etc. Those player rankings then impact allocated scholarship money, and consequently playing opportunities at the college level. It only makes sense for college coaches to give more playing opportunities to the players with the higher scholarship amounts. As Capital's recruiting success bears out, the fair play system works very well at getting significant numbers of commits to D1 program. Its not as great at allowing the most dominate players to shine as brightly (as compared to other clubs) which can lead to more buzz, higher rankings, scholarships & consequently college opportunities.

You’re reading too many spy novels. Scroll back and look at the accolades and playing time of the 23s. Case made, case closed.

Capitals systems works well for IVYs who don't offer scholies. Not so much at top ACC, BIG or "Sec" schools

[Anonymous]

This is my new favorite thread. You've been replaced 2028 parents, sorry. These people are crazier!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 2023s I know have seen the field for less than 10 minutes in their first season and a half. I mentioned the comparison of Capitals players to the true lacrosse town players the other day in the ISL thread and was chastised for spending time tracking players' time--which I didn't do, other than a few former teammates--and certainly not to this extend. But I feel slightly vindicated. As a former Philadelphia area, top D1 player, I know real lacrosse, and our local teams just don't have it.

Three Capital 2023s have received great playing time, all are on top 25 teams:

Two are at UVA (currently ranked #9):
- One played in 16 games as a freshman and thus far has started in all 15 games as a sophomore. She made the All-ACC team as a freshman.
- Another played in five games as a freshman and has had time in 14 of 15 games this season.

Another is at Harvard (currently ranked #23). She started in 13 of 15 games as a freshman and thus far has started in all 12 games as a sophomore. She made the All-Ivy team as a freshman.

These are the two most competitive conferences in the country.

Another Cap 23 is at #11 Michigan and has played in 13 of 14 games as a sophomore with 7 starts.

And what of the other 23 on that team? Hmm?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Recapping D1 playing time for the Cap 2023s:

- Four on top 25 teams (UVA 2X, Harvard, Michigan) have played in all / nearly all games as sophomores, with two starting every game this year; two played in every game freshman year, with one starting in most (13/15)
- One at a top three team (Northwestern) has played in over 70 percent of games as a sophomore.
- One at Pitt has played in all 15 games as a sophomore with 8 starts.
- One at VCU played in all 18 games as a freshman (7 starts) and has started in 14 of 15 games as a sophomore.
- One at Colgate played in all 17 games as a freshman (16 starts), and started in all 13 games this year.
- One at St. Joe’s played in 11 games as a freshman and 10 games thus far as a sophomore
- One of the top 25 players made All-ACC as a freshman, another made All-Ivy as a freshman.
- Two made the Atlantic 10 All-Rookie team as freshmen

There are two at Michigan, so check your stats again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter is from Howard County and plays for Heroes and didn't get the GPA or SAT scores of Capital Kids that go to top schools. Therefore I am going to trash on Capital Recruit play time.

My daughter is from Arlington County and plays for Capital and got the best GPA and SAT scores to all her top schools. Therefore I watch as she got $0 in scholarship money and sit on the bench for 4 years. Just to protect the Capital recruiting image.

huzzah! Truth shall set you all free. Cap parents will never concede because they planned, manipulated, and spent loads of money living to impress someone else. For every one cap player that actually plays there are dozens who ride the pine and wonder how it ended up the way it did.

Fake news… nice try

[Anonymous]

2025 season stats on active rosters of the top three teams comparing playing time of Capital, M&D and Hero's players:

UNC #1
- Two M&D players have each played in 14 games
- One Capital player has played in 8 games
- No Hero's players are on the roster

BC #2
- One Capital player has played in 15 games
- One M&D player has played in three games
- One M&D player has played in zero games
- No Hero's players are on the roster

NW #3

- One Capital player has played in 10 games
- No M&D or Hero's players are on the roster

Total games played among the top three teams in 2025:

- Capital players = 33
- M&D players = 31
- Hero's = 0

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:2025 season stats on active rosters of the top three teams comparing playing time of Capital, M&D and Hero's players:

UNC #1
- Two M&D players have each played in 14 games
- One Capital player has played in 8 games
- No Hero's players are on the roster

BC #2
- One Capital player has played in 15 games
- One M&D player has played in three games
- One M&D player has played in zero games
- No Hero's players are on the roster

NW #3

- One Capital player has played in 10 games
- No M&D or Hero's players are on the roster

Total games played among the top three teams in 2025:

- Capital players = 33
- M&D players = 31
- Hero's = 0

Are these stats correct? I have a hard time believing there are so few M&D players and no Hero’s players on those teams.