2028 Girls Lacrosse

[Anonymous]

Being on the Prep Girls Lacrosse list is the most prestigious thing there is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Being on the Prep Girls Lacrosse list is the most prestigious thing there is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Being on the Prep Girls Lacrosse list is the most prestigious thing there is.

Wait, I thought it was getting a US Club Lax rating after paying for it. That's what I read here last year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being on the Prep Girls Lacrosse list is the most prestigious thing there is.

Wait, I thought it was getting a US Club Lax rating after paying for it. That's what I read here last year.

couple of questions:
apologies for ignorance, what is prep girls lacrosse?

and if you can pay for a IL lax rating, does anyone take that seriously?

last one, how do you get rated for stars and is that connected to IL?

[Anonymous]

My take on ratings. Every recruiting consultant and coach will tell you they don’t matter. Inside Lacrosse is, however, widely read and cited. Schools measure recruiting classes on how many 4 and 5 stars they land, for example.

IL has a consistent methodology, but it is applied by individuals who perceive things differently, and at a moment in time—a showcase, game, or video evaluation—that is necessarily affected by the level of competition. I have noted significant variances and an element of grade inflation or deflation based on where a player was seen and against whom. The same players are an 82 one day and within a month, an 88. That’s probably not possible.

So, do they matter? Not really. A lot of great players at great programs who never got a rating. Is it probable that a top recruit at a top program has one, or at least a star rating? Yes. But correlation is not causation. It’s a welcome thing if your daughter angers a good one, but it’s not essential at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My take on ratings. Every recruiting consultant and coach will tell you they don’t matter. Inside Lacrosse is, however, widely read and cited. Schools measure recruiting classes on how many 4 and 5 stars they land, for example.

IL has a consistent methodology, but it is applied by individuals who perceive things differently, and at a moment in time—a showcase, game, or video evaluation—that is necessarily affected by the level of competition. I have noted significant variances and an element of grade inflation or deflation based on where a player was seen and against whom. The same players are an 82 one day and within a month, an 88. That’s probably not possible.

So, do they matter? Not really. A lot of great players at great programs who never got a rating. Is it probable that a top recruit at a top program has one, or at least a star rating? Yes. But correlation is not causation. It’s a welcome thing if your daughter angers a good one, but it’s not essential at all.

I agree that the 0–100 numerical ratings assigned at IL events do not carry much weight. The 4- and 5-star ratings, along with recruit rankings (e.g., Riley Davis as the No. 1 recruit in the 2027 class), matter more, but they largely reflect feedback from college coaches who spent the summer evaluating players. IL is not generating those rankings on its own. Instead, it is working with programs to create a list that will mostly mirror the recruiting results that take shape starting in September. When the star ratings and recruit rankings are released in August, they offer an early look at the top players on the boards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My take on ratings. Every recruiting consultant and coach will tell you they don’t matter. Inside Lacrosse is, however, widely read and cited. Schools measure recruiting classes on how many 4 and 5 stars they land, for example.

IL has a consistent methodology, but it is applied by individuals who perceive things differently, and at a moment in time—a showcase, game, or video evaluation—that is necessarily affected by the level of competition. I have noted significant variances and an element of grade inflation or deflation based on where a player was seen and against whom. The same players are an 82 one day and within a month, an 88. That’s probably not possible.

So, do they matter? Not really. A lot of great players at great programs who never got a rating. Is it probable that a top recruit at a top program has one, or at least a star rating? Yes. But correlation is not causation. It’s a welcome thing if your daughter angers a good one, but it’s not essential at all.

I agree that the 0–100 numerical ratings assigned at IL events do not carry much weight. The 4- and 5-star ratings, along with recruit rankings (e.g., Riley Davis as the No. 1 recruit in the 2027 class), matter more, but they largely reflect feedback from college coaches who spent the summer evaluating players. IL is not generating those rankings on its own. Instead, it is working with programs to create a list that will mostly mirror the recruiting results that take shape starting in September. When the star ratings and recruit rankings are released in August, they offer an early look at the top players on the boards.

Here's a good example . . . Avery Fordham was a 5-star Florida recruit last year rated #4 in her recruiting class. In her entire career she never received an IL 0-100 rating and ended up at the top of the list. The 0-100 ratings are almost entirely meaningless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:--3 in 2024 (pre-Cap; now Cap Blue)
--4 in 2025
--4 in 2026

Pretty low numbers for a top team

The 2025 team finished as the #2 team in the country so ~20% of the the team must be pretty high or average numbers for a top team.

I think those numbers were supposed to show how many CLC Blue 2028s went to BIC each of those summer sessions. I'd guess the 2025 Cap Blue team sent more than 3 or 4 to BIC each summer

Nope; those were the Cap Blue 2028 numbers for the past three years as this is a 2028 thread. And they are relatively low for a top team. Capital leadership has explicitly told players and families that it does not advocate for showcase invitations for Capital players--by policy--and has generally suggested that it is unnecessary to attend. They do not have a mechanism for prioritizing. Somehow, M&D, Hero's, YJ, Monsters, NXT, Prime Time, and many others, figure this out while managing culture implications--even for coaches' daughters. Capital girls that make BIC have managed to catch Deemer's eye through play at tournaments, American Select, or by video, or they have had non-Capital advocates.

Ultimately, I’m not really sure how much sway the coaches recommendations have over the invites, though I know they are asked to recommend their top X number (not sure the exact number, 5 or 6 I would guess, but can think of many examples where this has not moved the needle). I guess you’re saying that Capital will not even go so far as to name their top girls?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being on the Prep Girls Lacrosse list is the most prestigious thing there is.

Wait, I thought it was getting a US Club Lax rating after paying for it. That's what I read here last year.

couple of questions:
apologies for ignorance, what is prep girls lacrosse?

and if you can pay for a IL lax rating, does anyone take that seriously?

last one, how do you get rated for stars and is that connected to IL?

Wake up! Whether you like it or not, you're directly and/or indirectly paying (i.e. Time, travel, coaches, spotlights, etc.) for ratings and evaluations. All these events have their methods of evaluating and very subjective in nature. Reliability, who knows? Each is a marketing machine and aimed at generating revenue and clout. Reality is that it's a business and this is how the game is played, won't even get into the politics of the selection process. Anyhow, suggestion to you 2028 parents, use it to your advantage as each outlet has it's own advantage. Hopefully, to land your daughters' (and your) dream schools. 100% agree with a poster before that instead of turning on each other, work together to give you and daughters the best experience this summer. Best of luck to all!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:--3 in 2024 (pre-Cap; now Cap Blue)
--4 in 2025
--4 in 2026

Pretty low numbers for a top team

The 2025 team finished as the #2 team in the country so ~20% of the the team must be pretty high or average numbers for a top team.

I think those numbers were supposed to show how many CLC Blue 2028s went to BIC each of those summer sessions. I'd guess the 2025 Cap Blue team sent more than 3 or 4 to BIC each summer

Nope; those were the Cap Blue 2028 numbers for the past three years as this is a 2028 thread. And they are relatively low for a top team. Capital leadership has explicitly told players and families that it does not advocate for showcase invitations for Capital players--by policy--and has generally suggested that it is unnecessary to attend. They do not have a mechanism for prioritizing. Somehow, M&D, Hero's, YJ, Monsters, NXT, Prime Time, and many others, figure this out while managing culture implications--even for coaches' daughters. Capital girls that make BIC have managed to catch Deemer's eye through play at tournaments, American Select, or by video, or they have had non-Capital advocates.

Ultimately, I’m not really sure how much sway the coaches recommendations have over the invites, though I know they are asked to recommend their top X number (not sure the exact number, 5 or 6 I would guess, but can think of many examples where this has not moved the needle). I guess you’re saying that Capital will not even go so far as to name their top girls?

Yes; that’s what I’m saying. When you get to 9-11 invites as a club in the back half of the top 20, there is clearly some effective advocacy going on. Capital expressly does not do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:--3 in 2024 (pre-Cap; now Cap Blue)
--4 in 2025
--4 in 2026

Pretty low numbers for a top team

The 2025 team finished as the #2 team in the country so ~20% of the the team must be pretty high or average numbers for a top team.

I think those numbers were supposed to show how many CLC Blue 2028s went to BIC each of those summer sessions. I'd guess the 2025 Cap Blue team sent more than 3 or 4 to BIC each summer

Nope; those were the Cap Blue 2028 numbers for the past three years as this is a 2028 thread. And they are relatively low for a top team. Capital leadership has explicitly told players and families that it does not advocate for showcase invitations for Capital players--by policy--and has generally suggested that it is unnecessary to attend. They do not have a mechanism for prioritizing. Somehow, M&D, Hero's, YJ, Monsters, NXT, Prime Time, and many others, figure this out while managing culture implications--even for coaches' daughters. Capital girls that make BIC have managed to catch Deemer's eye through play at tournaments, American Select, or by video, or they have had non-Capital advocates.

Ultimately, I’m not really sure how much sway the coaches recommendations have over the invites, though I know they are asked to recommend their top X number (not sure the exact number, 5 or 6 I would guess, but can think of many examples where this has not moved the needle). I guess you’re saying that Capital will not even go so far as to name their top girls?

Yes; that’s what I’m saying. When you get to 9-11 invites as a club in the back half of the top 20, there is clearly some effective advocacy going on. Capital expressly does not do that.

Um which 25-30 ranked club is sending 9-11 girls to Summer BIC? That would be very surprising…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:--3 in 2024 (pre-Cap; now Cap Blue)
--4 in 2025
--4 in 2026

Pretty low numbers for a top team

The 2025 team finished as the #2 team in the country so ~20% of the the team must be pretty high or average numbers for a top team.

I think those numbers were supposed to show how many CLC Blue 2028s went to BIC each of those summer sessions. I'd guess the 2025 Cap Blue team sent more than 3 or 4 to BIC each summer

Nope; those were the Cap Blue 2028 numbers for the past three years as this is a 2028 thread. And they are relatively low for a top team. Capital leadership has explicitly told players and families that it does not advocate for showcase invitations for Capital players--by policy--and has generally suggested that it is unnecessary to attend. They do not have a mechanism for prioritizing. Somehow, M&D, Hero's, YJ, Monsters, NXT, Prime Time, and many others, figure this out while managing culture implications--even for coaches' daughters. Capital girls that make BIC have managed to catch Deemer's eye through play at tournaments, American Select, or by video, or they have had non-Capital advocates.

Ultimately, I’m not really sure how much sway the coaches recommendations have over the invites, though I know they are asked to recommend their top X number (not sure the exact number, 5 or 6 I would guess, but can think of many examples where this has not moved the needle). I guess you’re saying that Capital will not even go so far as to name their top girls?

Yes; that’s what I’m saying. When you get to 9-11 invites as a club in the back half of the top 20, there is clearly some effective advocacy going on. Capital expressly does not do that.

Um which 25-30 ranked club is sending 9-11 girls to Summer BIC? That would be very surprising…

CT Grizzlies, ranked 37, sent 11 last year. Um, consider yourself surprised.

[Anonymous]

Gold Coast ranked 28th had 10. You would think with 10 BIC players they would be destroying most teams…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gold Coast ranked 28th had 10. You would think with 10 BIC players they would be destroying most teams…

BIC is very political, your last name is worth more than how you play on field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gold Coast ranked 28th had 10. You would think with 10 BIC players they would be destroying most teams…

BIC is very political, your last name is worth more than how you play on field.

Plenty of top players did not get in.