Choosing a high school

[Anonymous]

Do most of the boys from the top travel teams get recruited and base their high school choice on lax? Or were they going to go to those schools all along regardless? I'm talking about privates and Catholic schools.

[Anonymous]

Yes my son spoke to the coach as an 8th grader and yes it was a huge factor in his decision for high school but I wouldn’t say solely just lacrosse. Most, if not all, of these schools are great well rounded schools so it’s almost like a can’t miss if private is on your radar.

[Anonymous]

I would say yes if your son plays on Madlax or NL, less so for VLC and not sure about BW - I think most of them already are in private. Our DS was recruited to private from Madlax.

[Anonymous]

"Recruiting" 8th grade kids to a high school - is that really a thing?

I assume it means they get admitted, not that they get any kind of scholarship...

[Anonymous]

OP here. These are good points and helpful. I know some of the k-12 schools definitely recruit from within, but my son is at a k-8 so we're starting to think about future HS options, although I know a lot can change lax-wise in middle school as the boys mature. Thanks everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Recruiting" 8th grade kids to a high school - is that really a thing?

I assume it means they get admitted, not that they get any kind of scholarship...

Money is need based no matter what, however being a talented athlete can certainly increase your chances of being accepted to a school that is typically very difficult to get into.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Recruiting" 8th grade kids to a high school - is that really a thing?

I assume it means they get admitted, not that they get any kind of scholarship...

Money is need based no matter what, however being a talented athlete can certainly increase your chances of being accepted to a school that is typically very difficult to get into.

Not true anymore. Bullis and many of the schools in the WCAC absolutely provide athletic based scholarships. This has been discussed many times on many different threads.

[Anonymous]

I would not call what many of the schools do, "recruiting". I know many strong lacrosse players who visited schools and asked to meet with the lacrosse coaches. If those coaches like the kid, they encourage the kid to apply and attend. I do not call that recruiting, which I have always thought of more like a coach goes out and actively tries to find players. I am not aware of any staffs that are organized and do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would not call what many of the schools do, "recruiting". I know many strong lacrosse players who visited schools and asked to meet with the lacrosse coaches. If those coaches like the kid, they encourage the kid to apply and attend. I do not call that recruiting, which I have always thought of more like a coach goes out and actively tries to find players. I am not aware of any staffs that are organized and do that.

You are kidding right? That is the very definition of recruiting. From the NCAA: The NCAA defines recruiting as “any solicitation of prospective student-athletes or their parents by an institutional staff member or by a representative of the institution’s athletics interests for the purpose of securing a prospective student-athlete’s enrollment and ultimate participation in the institution’s intercollegiate athletics program.”

How do you think the kid from STAB got to Bullis lacrosse tuition free and then transferred right back? or the current QB from SJC? or the prior QB? or the one before that? Schools can claim all they want their financial aid isn't merit, read athletic, based but it is a sham and disgraceful. Just say you do it and move on. The WCAC has already separated their divisions and Bullis should join them and maybe Landon's football team too.

Go hang out during the fall lacrosse tournaments and see how many windbreakers are being worn by coaches from in and around the DC area. Then check out the conversations taking place after the game. It sure looks and sounds like recruiting to me when the coach asks the kid if he's considered applying to his school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would not call what many of the schools do, "recruiting". I know many strong lacrosse players who visited schools and asked to meet with the lacrosse coaches. If those coaches like the kid, they encourage the kid to apply and attend. I do not call that recruiting, which I have always thought of more like a coach goes out and actively tries to find players. I am not aware of any staffs that are organized and do that.

You are kidding right? That is the very definition of recruiting. From the NCAA: The NCAA defines recruiting as “any solicitation of prospective student-athletes or their parents by an institutional staff member or by a representative of the institution’s athletics interests for the purpose of securing a prospective student-athlete’s enrollment and ultimate participation in the institution’s intercollegiate athletics program.”

How do you think the kid from STAB got to Bullis lacrosse tuition free and then transferred right back? or the current QB from SJC? or the prior QB? or the one before that? Schools can claim all they want their financial aid isn't merit, read athletic, based but it is a sham and disgraceful. Just say you do it and move on. The WCAC has already separated their divisions and Bullis should join them and maybe Landon's football team too.

Go hang out during the fall lacrosse tournaments and see how many windbreakers are being worn by coaches from in and around the DC area. Then check out the conversations taking place after the game. It sure looks and sounds like recruiting to me when the coach asks the kid if he's considered applying to his school.

What you said at the end (bolded) is definitely recruiting.

What the PP said (kid visits school, meets lacrosse coach) isn't recruiting.

"Schools can claim all they want their financial aid isn't merit, read athletic, based but it is a sham and disgraceful." -- what is disgraceful about giving money to athletes? Get a grip already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would not call what many of the schools do, "recruiting". I know many strong lacrosse players who visited schools and asked to meet with the lacrosse coaches. If those coaches like the kid, they encourage the kid to apply and attend. I do not call that recruiting, which I have always thought of more like a coach goes out and actively tries to find players. I am not aware of any staffs that are organized and do that.

You are kidding right? That is the very definition of recruiting. From the NCAA: The NCAA defines recruiting as “any solicitation of prospective student-athletes or their parents by an institutional staff member or by a representative of the institution’s athletics interests for the purpose of securing a prospective student-athlete’s enrollment and ultimate participation in the institution’s intercollegiate athletics program.”

How do you think the kid from STAB got to Bullis lacrosse tuition free and then transferred right back? or the current QB from SJC? or the prior QB? or the one before that? Schools can claim all they want their financial aid isn't merit, read athletic, based but it is a sham and disgraceful. Just say you do it and move on. The WCAC has already separated their divisions and Bullis should join them and maybe Landon's football team too.

Go hang out during the fall lacrosse tournaments and see how many windbreakers are being worn by coaches from in and around the DC area. Then check out the conversations taking place after the game. It sure looks and sounds like recruiting to me when the coach asks the kid if he's considered applying to his school.

What you said at the end (bolded) is definitely recruiting.

What the PP said (kid visits school, meets lacrosse coach) isn't recruiting.

"Schools can claim all they want their financial aid isn't merit, read athletic, based but it is a sham and disgraceful." -- what is disgraceful about giving money to athletes? Get a grip already.

You are correct in that visiting a school and asking to see a coach is not recruiting and I don't think recruiting is inherently evil or disgraceful. The problem lies in that schools in the WCAC and others like Bullis are claiming they only give need based aid and that is simply not true. Why hide behind the lie and look at a school like Landon where they had 35 kids on last year's football team and 22 were kids of color and almost all were receiving "need" based aid. I'd like to know how many need based kids in the WCAC and similiar schools offered aid to kids because they were good at science, math or literature first and athletics was secondary.

Kids whose families pay tuition at these schools think they will get a fair shot at making the team and they find out they don't. It happens a lot less in a sport like lacrosse because of the participation rates.

Schools think this is a glorious path to something and it is not. Giving and participation actually goes down in schools where this takes place. If this strategy worked, DeMatha would be at the top of the heap and Montrose Christian and St. Anthony's would still be in operation. GP got into this model about 15 years ago and then worked their way out of it because of alumni backlash. Their teams aren't as good as they once were but donor participation went up.

Give all the money you want in athletic scholarship form but don't pretend you don't. Then separate your school athletically from schools that don't do this so the competition on the field is better. And if you are a parent of kid who is as good or better as the kid playing but receives $$, recognize your kid will not be on the field or court.

[Anonymous]

And if you are a parent of kid who is as good or better as the kid playing but receives $$, recognize your kid will not be on the field or court.

What are you talking about???? A coach is going to play the best kid he has, whether that kid was recruited or not. Period. We've been to three Open Houses in the last month and met coaches at every one. Why do you think the coaches are there? The 1st question was what club do you play for, 2nd question was what position do you play and third was what year are you. We met Math and Science teachers, but never the head of the Math or Science Club because those groups are great, but don't bring money into the schools. It's the same reason why HS coaches develop relationships with clubs and go to travel tournaments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And if you are a parent of kid who is as good or better as the kid playing but receives $$, recognize your kid will not be on the field or court.

What are you talking about???? A coach is going to play the best kid he has, whether that kid was recruited or not. Period. We've been to three Open Houses in the last month and met coaches at every one. Why do you think the coaches are there? The 1st question was what club do you play for, 2nd question was what position do you play and third was what year are you. We met Math and Science teachers, but never the head of the Math or Science Club because those groups are great, but don't bring money into the schools. It's the same reason why HS coaches develop relationships with clubs and go to travel tournaments.

Keep dreaming on the best player plays idea. Prior to widespread recruiting and financial aid, a kid on a team had to deal with the rich alumni's parent giving $. Now he has to deal with both that family and the coach's recruit getting preferential treatment.

And the idea that HS sports brings money into schools is laughable. It is an absolute drain and the drain gets larger when dozens of kids are given financial aid to play football and basketball and now some in other sports. Let's take Bullis for example. They provide almost $6 million in grants every year. Not all of that money is earmarked to athletics but a substantial amount is. This means the families paying full tuition are subsidizing the school to the tune of over $11,000 per year. That's a significant chunk of the $43k+ in tuittion. If only half of that money is for "need-based" athletes, the idea that athletics brings in over $3 million in concessions and gifts is insane. High school sports should be done for the student experience.

As soon as someone can provide examples where high school athletics helps a school increase the endowment and lowers tuition rather than the other way around, I will consider the argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And if you are a parent of kid who is as good or better as the kid playing but receives $$, recognize your kid will not be on the field or court.

What are you talking about???? A coach is going to play the best kid he has, whether that kid was recruited or not. Period. We've been to three Open Houses in the last month and met coaches at every one. Why do you think the coaches are there? The 1st question was what club do you play for, 2nd question was what position do you play and third was what year are you. We met Math and Science teachers, but never the head of the Math or Science Club because those groups are great, but don't bring money into the schools. It's the same reason why HS coaches develop relationships with clubs and go to travel tournaments.

Keep dreaming on the best player plays idea. Prior to widespread recruiting and financial aid, a kid on a team had to deal with the rich alumni's parent giving $. Now he has to deal with both that family and the coach's recruit getting preferential treatment.

And the idea that HS sports brings money into schools is laughable. It is an absolute drain and the drain gets larger when dozens of kids are given financial aid to play football and basketball and now some in other sports. Let's take Bullis for example. They provide almost $6 million in grants every year. Not all of that money is earmarked to athletics but a substantial amount is. This means the families paying full tuition are subsidizing the school to the tune of over $11,000 per year. That's a significant chunk of the $43k+ in tuittion. If only half of that money is for "need-based" athletes, the idea that athletics brings in over $3 million in concessions and gifts is insane. High school sports should be done for the student experience.

As soon as someone can provide examples where high school athletics helps a school increase the endowment and lowers tuition rather than the other way around, I will consider the argument.

I'm not going to say which school, but we've seen it does help the endowment to be able to say we won this/that league/championship. Also some of the kids recruited to play are full-pay and do have parents with serious funds. Not every recruit needs FA, including minorities. Some of you would be surprised how many minorities in this area are full pay because they are from well off families. Many families with money are discrete and you'd never know how wealthy they are.

[Anonymous]

I'm not going to say which school, but we've seen it does help the endowment to be able to say we won this/that league/championship. Also some of the kids recruited to play are full-pay and do have parents with serious funds. Not every recruit needs FA, including minorities. Some of you would be surprised how many minorities in this area are full pay because they are from well off families. Many families with money are discrete and you'd never know how wealthy they are.

If you aren't willing to say then you have nothing to say. It's an anonymous forum. Montrose Christian and St. Anthony's closed on this thinking. Flint Hill, GP, Sidwell all reduced athletic importance. DeMatha started the athletic strategy in the early 70's and no one thinks of it as anywhere near a top school. I contend that any positive giving from athletics based on financial aid is negated by the amount withdrawn and headaches it causes. No kidding in that there are minority families who make money and no kidding in that there are tuition paying families paying sports. The argument is there are too many grants being given towards sports and it has gotten out of balance with a number of schools.

But if schools want to do it, have at it but don't try to say the competition is equal or kids have anything close to an equal shot for playing time or even making the team. The WCAC has stopped pretending, O'Connell stepped back and Bullis and others who want to embrace it should join together.