2027 GIRLS PLAYER COMMITMENTS 🥍🥍🥍

[Anonymous]

Congratulations to the SR Orange player to be the first commit from Capital! Really good player and student. Great accomplishment for SR and Capital.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:D1 Mom. Not referring to Dartmouth recruit AT ALL - just to some of the follow up comments. All of this using lacrosse to get into a top school is overrated if the kid is just squeaking in. Saying you don’t care if they play another minute or win another game is a pipe dream. It may be a great school, but they will still have to practice, lift, run 4-5 hours a day, travel constantly, have mental breakdowns frequently - all to sit on the bench at games. Actually, stand on the sidelines being told they are not cheering enough. I would caution you - don’t let your kid be miserable. Go to a slightly “lesser” school where your child can thrive and be happy. You can get a great job from every school although you may have to work a little harder. This obsession over using lacrosse to get into certain schools is insane. Your child’s happiness is more important. Speaking from experience, not just my kid but all the ones around her too - with a rare exception!

One very common refrain on these boards is parents talking about what they themselves want out of it. Can't help but think that is driving the process to a degree that it shouldn't. Within fiscal means of course, the parents' goal should be to help kids where they can to allow them to find out/discover/choose where THEY want to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious what the miserable poster above thinks about the Cap Orange player going so quickly. Shout out to her!

I think it is wonderful, she should be super proud. If she works hard she can be set up for success, Dartmouth is a great school. But to my point regarding top recruits, Dartmouth isn’t very good, they got smashed by every decent team they played last year. They have had some recruiting successes in the past two cycles, nabbing a few highly ranked kids, but the rest of their classes are typically marginal D1 types.

LMAO, Dartmouth was a top 25 team last year, they're not very good? They got smashed by every decent team? They beat top 20 UMass, got 3 top 30 wins elsewhere, were in 2 and 3 goal games in the 4th quarter with the 3 heavyweights of the Ivy before bleeding out.

Would they get smashed by a top 3 team about every time, and have trouble if they played a top 6 team every week? Yes, and so would 95% or more of wlax.

That's funny you concede their better recruiting classes are recently (including a 5* and 4 4*s as freshmen for this year), but want to point out previous classes to that weren't as good. So they may be... better? Won't the 27s be playing with the recent classes and not the ones that have since graduated?

Weird post. No dog in the fight.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/league/wdi/polls/2025/495

Didn’t make one appearance in top 25, week one to the final.

https://www.espn.com/womens-college-lacrosse/rankings

Same here

Lol

Cool. Thanks for the "media" poll of probably 3 people on twitter and some IL writers who hopefully do it part-time for their $30k a year.
They finished 22 in RPI. Your UMass fave is on there. They played Brown to a 1 goal game. I thought they got smashed by everyone? They played 9 teams in the top 30 RPI and finished 9 and 6, beating 4 of top 30s. There are 130+ teams in Division 1, and yet you believe they've been able to do what they did with all marginal D1 recruits. You're a hoot.

Lmao, RPI is just an algo, much like US club lax’s, and it is adjusted by humans just like the polls. Who do you think is a better judge of rankings, some computer nerd or the actual D1 coaches that get polled for the coaches rankings?

RPI was introduced in the 1980s and I believe hasn't been adjusted since. What "adjustment by humans" do you believe is going on?

Considering RPI is used for really the only reason to have rankings in the first place, the NCAA tournament, and coaches' polls aren't, I'd say the algo. You quite obviously don't understand how few sh*** coaches care about voting in the coaches polls. Serious question - are you new to lacrosse?

The NCAA selection committee’s own docs clearly state that they use record against ranked teams, SOS based on how opponents ranked, and significant wins and losses using a given team’s rankings. RPI is used too, but so are rankings.

You are new to lacrosse. The "rankings", or more accurately the ratings, ARE THE RPI RANKINGS! Nowhere anywhere will you see the words coaches poll. Do you know what SOS is? It's the 2nd and 3rd components of the RPI, in the same percentage vs each other. 2:1. Winning percentage is the 1st component.
https://www.ncaa.com/championships/lacrosse-women/d1/road-to-the-championship#:~:text=Comprehensive%20evaluation%20of%20the%20Rating,of%20schedule%20and%20winning%20percentage.

You are clueless. Your last coaches poll shows they managed to get 15 coaches out of 130+ to submit one this year, telling their asst to the asst AD to fax it over. That's not as good as the 18 they had last year, but better than the 13 from 2 years ago. No one cares about it, and they're certainly not pouring over film and stats of every candidate in their free 10 days before summer long recruiting starts.

Yeah, that’s not me talking about the RPI. I am well aware of it, how it is used, and why the NCAA selection committees have all moved away from it being a main criteria. Are coaches or media polls perfect, of course not, but the NCAA is moving away from the RPI for a reason. Basketball has already stopped using it if I recall correctly.

NCAA hoops moved to a different quantitative system. They also don't use polls. Neither does lacrosse. Hockey is a straight mathematical formula.

The rankings (ratings) they're talking about (wins and losses against, etc.) are the RPI rankings. Not the polls. So you're not well aware. Until now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Congratulations to the SR Orange player to be the first commit from Capital! Really good player and student. Great accomplishment for SR and Capital.

ISL champ to first Cap commit. Pretty good 4 months. Congratulations

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Congratulations to the SR Orange player to be the first commit from Capital! Really good player and student. Great accomplishment for SR and Capital.

ISL champ to first Cap commit. Pretty good 4 months. Congratulations

Stone Ridge players will all do well this September.

[Anonymous]

Whether a kid commits to Dartmouth or Delaware State say something nice or keep it yourself. These kids have worked hard to get to this point and don't deserve the critical analysis from the middle age fatties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious what the miserable poster above thinks about the Cap Orange player going so quickly. Shout out to her!

I think it is wonderful, she should be super proud. If she works hard she can be set up for success, Dartmouth is a great school. But to my point regarding top recruits, Dartmouth isn’t very good, they got smashed by every decent team they played last year. They have had some recruiting successes in the past two cycles, nabbing a few highly ranked kids, but the rest of their classes are typically marginal D1 types.

LMAO, Dartmouth was a top 25 team last year, they're not very good? They got smashed by every decent team? They beat top 20 UMass, got 3 top 30 wins elsewhere, were in 2 and 3 goal games in the 4th quarter with the 3 heavyweights of the Ivy before bleeding out.

Would they get smashed by a top 3 team about every time, and have trouble if they played a top 6 team every week? Yes, and so would 95% or more of wlax.

That's funny you concede their better recruiting classes are recently (including a 5* and 4 4*s as freshmen for this year), but want to point out previous classes to that weren't as good. So they may be... better? Won't the 27s be playing with the recent classes and not the ones that have since graduated?

Weird post. No dog in the fight.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/league/wdi/polls/2025/495

Didn’t make one appearance in top 25, week one to the final.

https://www.espn.com/womens-college-lacrosse/rankings

Same here

Lol

Cool. Thanks for the "media" poll of probably 3 people on twitter and some IL writers who hopefully do it part-time for their $30k a year.
They finished 22 in RPI. Your UMass fave is on there. They played Brown to a 1 goal game. I thought they got smashed by everyone? They played 9 teams in the top 30 RPI and finished 9 and 6, beating 4 of top 30s. There are 130+ teams in Division 1, and yet you believe they've been able to do what they did with all marginal D1 recruits. You're a hoot.

Lmao, RPI is just an algo, much like US club lax’s, and it is adjusted by humans just like the polls. Who do you think is a better judge of rankings, some computer nerd or the actual D1 coaches that get polled for the coaches rankings?

RPI was introduced in the 1980s and I believe hasn't been adjusted since. What "adjustment by humans" do you believe is going on?

Considering RPI is used for really the only reason to have rankings in the first place, the NCAA tournament, and coaches' polls aren't, I'd say the algo. You quite obviously don't understand how few sh*** coaches care about voting in the coaches polls. Serious question - are you new to lacrosse?

The NCAA selection committee’s own docs clearly state that they use record against ranked teams, SOS based on how opponents ranked, and significant wins and losses using a given team’s rankings. RPI is used too, but so are rankings.

You are new to lacrosse. The "rankings", or more accurately the ratings, ARE THE RPI RANKINGS! Nowhere anywhere will you see the words coaches poll. Do you know what SOS is? It's the 2nd and 3rd components of the RPI, in the same percentage vs each other. 2:1. Winning percentage is the 1st component.
https://www.ncaa.com/championships/lacrosse-women/d1/road-to-the-championship#:~:text=Comprehensive%20evaluation%20of%20the%20Rating,of%20schedule%20and%20winning%20percentage.

You are clueless. Your last coaches poll shows they managed to get 15 coaches out of 130+ to submit one this year, telling their asst to the asst AD to fax it over. That's not as good as the 18 they had last year, but better than the 13 from 2 years ago. No one cares about it, and they're certainly not pouring over film and stats of every candidate in their free 10 days before summer long recruiting starts.

Yeah, that’s not me talking about the RPI. I am well aware of it, how it is used, and why the NCAA selection committees have all moved away from it being a main criteria. Are coaches or media polls perfect, of course not, but the NCAA is moving away from the RPI for a reason. Basketball has already stopped using it if I recall correctly.

NCAA hoops moved to a different quantitative system. They also don't use polls. Neither does lacrosse. Hockey is a straight mathematical formula.

The rankings (ratings) they're talking about (wins and losses against, etc.) are the RPI rankings. Not the polls. So you're not well aware. Until now.

I think you are mixing up arguments, I never said RPI was worse than coaches
and/or media polls, and I never said anything about polls being used for tournament seeding. And so I was correct, basketball has moved away from RPI, I guess I was aware.

[Anonymous]

Any other commits? Anything??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Congratulations to the SR Orange player to be the first commit from Capital! Really good player and student. Great accomplishment for SR and Capital.

ISL champ to first Cap commit. Pretty good 4 months. Congratulations

Stone Ridge players will all do well this September.

Agree. SR had 5 ‘27s that started or got serious time on the ISL champ team. Great program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whether a kid commits to Dartmouth or Delaware State say something nice or keep it yourself. These kids have worked hard to get to this point and don't deserve the critical analysis from the middle age fatties.

Old heads looking all puffy on the sideline. Have another drink! Haha

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious what the miserable poster above thinks about the Cap Orange player going so quickly. Shout out to her!

I think it is wonderful, she should be super proud. If she works hard she can be set up for success, Dartmouth is a great school. But to my point regarding top recruits, Dartmouth isn’t very good, they got smashed by every decent team they played last year. They have had some recruiting successes in the past two cycles, nabbing a few highly ranked kids, but the rest of their classes are typically marginal D1 types.

LMAO, Dartmouth was a top 25 team last year, they're not very good? They got smashed by every decent team? They beat top 20 UMass, got 3 top 30 wins elsewhere, were in 2 and 3 goal games in the 4th quarter with the 3 heavyweights of the Ivy before bleeding out.

Would they get smashed by a top 3 team about every time, and have trouble if they played a top 6 team every week? Yes, and so would 95% or more of wlax.

That's funny you concede their better recruiting classes are recently (including a 5* and 4 4*s as freshmen for this year), but want to point out previous classes to that weren't as good. So they may be... better? Won't the 27s be playing with the recent classes and not the ones that have since graduated?

Weird post. No dog in the fight.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/league/wdi/polls/2025/495

Didn’t make one appearance in top 25, week one to the final.

https://www.espn.com/womens-college-lacrosse/rankings

Same here

Lol

Cool. Thanks for the "media" poll of probably 3 people on twitter and some IL writers who hopefully do it part-time for their $30k a year.
They finished 22 in RPI. Your UMass fave is on there. They played Brown to a 1 goal game. I thought they got smashed by everyone? They played 9 teams in the top 30 RPI and finished 9 and 6, beating 4 of top 30s. There are 130+ teams in Division 1, and yet you believe they've been able to do what they did with all marginal D1 recruits. You're a hoot.

Lmao, RPI is just an algo, much like US club lax’s, and it is adjusted by humans just like the polls. Who do you think is a better judge of rankings, some computer nerd or the actual D1 coaches that get polled for the coaches rankings?

RPI was introduced in the 1980s and I believe hasn't been adjusted since. What "adjustment by humans" do you believe is going on?

Considering RPI is used for really the only reason to have rankings in the first place, the NCAA tournament, and coaches' polls aren't, I'd say the algo. You quite obviously don't understand how few sh*** coaches care about voting in the coaches polls. Serious question - are you new to lacrosse?

The NCAA selection committee’s own docs clearly state that they use record against ranked teams, SOS based on how opponents ranked, and significant wins and losses using a given team’s rankings. RPI is used too, but so are rankings.

You are new to lacrosse. The "rankings", or more accurately the ratings, ARE THE RPI RANKINGS! Nowhere anywhere will you see the words coaches poll. Do you know what SOS is? It's the 2nd and 3rd components of the RPI, in the same percentage vs each other. 2:1. Winning percentage is the 1st component.
https://www.ncaa.com/championships/lacrosse-women/d1/road-to-the-championship#:~:text=Comprehensive%20evaluation%20of%20the%20Rating,of%20schedule%20and%20winning%20percentage.

You are clueless. Your last coaches poll shows they managed to get 15 coaches out of 130+ to submit one this year, telling their asst to the asst AD to fax it over. That's not as good as the 18 they had last year, but better than the 13 from 2 years ago. No one cares about it, and they're certainly not pouring over film and stats of every candidate in their free 10 days before summer long recruiting starts.

Yeah, that’s not me talking about the RPI. I am well aware of it, how it is used, and why the NCAA selection committees have all moved away from it being a main criteria. Are coaches or media polls perfect, of course not, but the NCAA is moving away from the RPI for a reason. Basketball has already stopped using it if I recall correctly.

NCAA hoops moved to a different quantitative system. They also don't use polls. Neither does lacrosse. Hockey is a straight mathematical formula.

The rankings (ratings) they're talking about (wins and losses against, etc.) are the RPI rankings. Not the polls. So you're not well aware. Until now.

I think you are mixing up arguments, I never said RPI was worse than coaches
and/or media polls, and I never said anything about polls being used for tournament seeding. And so I was correct, basketball has moved away from RPI, I guess I was aware.

What did you mean by this, then? Be specific:
"The NCAA selection committee’s own docs clearly state that they use record against ranked teams, SOS based on how opponents ranked, and significant wins and losses using a given team’s rankings. RPI is used too, but so are rankings. "

What did you mean by rankings?

NCAA selection committees haven't "all" been moving away from RPI being a main criteria. Where are you hearing this? RPI is used prominently in evaluating lacrosse teams for tournament selection. For everything except head-to-head, where it's not needed.

You laughed at the notion of RPI as a rankings tool vs your media and coaches poll faves. Instead of just leaving it. And now you're dug in. Dartmouth was the #22 team in the country last year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious what the miserable poster above thinks about the Cap Orange player going so quickly. Shout out to her!

I think it is wonderful, she should be super proud. If she works hard she can be set up for success, Dartmouth is a great school. But to my point regarding top recruits, Dartmouth isn’t very good, they got smashed by every decent team they played last year. They have had some recruiting successes in the past two cycles, nabbing a few highly ranked kids, but the rest of their classes are typically marginal D1 types.

LMAO, Dartmouth was a top 25 team last year, they're not very good? They got smashed by every decent team? They beat top 20 UMass, got 3 top 30 wins elsewhere, were in 2 and 3 goal games in the 4th quarter with the 3 heavyweights of the Ivy before bleeding out.

Would they get smashed by a top 3 team about every time, and have trouble if they played a top 6 team every week? Yes, and so would 95% or more of wlax.

That's funny you concede their better recruiting classes are recently (including a 5* and 4 4*s as freshmen for this year), but want to point out previous classes to that weren't as good. So they may be... better? Won't the 27s be playing with the recent classes and not the ones that have since graduated?

Weird post. No dog in the fight.

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/league/wdi/polls/2025/495

Didn’t make one appearance in top 25, week one to the final.

https://www.espn.com/womens-college-lacrosse/rankings

Same here

Lol

Cool. Thanks for the "media" poll of probably 3 people on twitter and some IL writers who hopefully do it part-time for their $30k a year.
They finished 22 in RPI. Your UMass fave is on there. They played Brown to a 1 goal game. I thought they got smashed by everyone? They played 9 teams in the top 30 RPI and finished 9 and 6, beating 4 of top 30s. There are 130+ teams in Division 1, and yet you believe they've been able to do what they did with all marginal D1 recruits. You're a hoot.

Lmao, RPI is just an algo, much like US club lax’s, and it is adjusted by humans just like the polls. Who do you think is a better judge of rankings, some computer nerd or the actual D1 coaches that get polled for the coaches rankings?

RPI was introduced in the 1980s and I believe hasn't been adjusted since. What "adjustment by humans" do you believe is going on?

Considering RPI is used for really the only reason to have rankings in the first place, the NCAA tournament, and coaches' polls aren't, I'd say the algo. You quite obviously don't understand how few sh*** coaches care about voting in the coaches polls. Serious question - are you new to lacrosse?

The NCAA selection committee’s own docs clearly state that they use record against ranked teams, SOS based on how opponents ranked, and significant wins and losses using a given team’s rankings. RPI is used too, but so are rankings.

You are new to lacrosse. The "rankings", or more accurately the ratings, ARE THE RPI RANKINGS! Nowhere anywhere will you see the words coaches poll. Do you know what SOS is? It's the 2nd and 3rd components of the RPI, in the same percentage vs each other. 2:1. Winning percentage is the 1st component.
https://www.ncaa.com/championships/lacrosse-women/d1/road-to-the-championship#:~:text=Comprehensive%20evaluation%20of%20the%20Rating,of%20schedule%20and%20winning%20percentage.

You are clueless. Your last coaches poll shows they managed to get 15 coaches out of 130+ to submit one this year, telling their asst to the asst AD to fax it over. That's not as good as the 18 they had last year, but better than the 13 from 2 years ago. No one cares about it, and they're certainly not pouring over film and stats of every candidate in their free 10 days before summer long recruiting starts.

Yeah, that’s not me talking about the RPI. I am well aware of it, how it is used, and why the NCAA selection committees have all moved away from it being a main criteria. Are coaches or media polls perfect, of course not, but the NCAA is moving away from the RPI for a reason. Basketball has already stopped using it if I recall correctly.

NCAA hoops moved to a different quantitative system. They also don't use polls. Neither does lacrosse. Hockey is a straight mathematical formula.

The rankings (ratings) they're talking about (wins and losses against, etc.) are the RPI rankings. Not the polls. So you're not well aware. Until now.

I think you are mixing up arguments, I never said RPI was worse than coaches
and/or media polls, and I never said anything about polls being used for tournament seeding. And so I was correct, basketball has moved away from RPI, I guess I was aware.

What did you mean by this, then? Be specific:
"The NCAA selection committee’s own docs clearly state that they use record against ranked teams, SOS based on how opponents ranked, and significant wins and losses using a given team’s rankings. RPI is used too, but so are rankings. "

What did you mean by rankings?

NCAA selection committees haven't "all" been moving away from RPI being a main criteria. Where are you hearing this? RPI is used prominently in evaluating lacrosse teams for tournament selection. For everything except head-to-head, where it's not needed.

You laughed at the notion of RPI as a rankings tool vs your media and coaches poll faves. Instead of just leaving it. And now you're dug in. Dartmouth was the #22 team in the country last year.

What I mean is I didn’t write that. I did post the two polls that showed Dartmouth outside of the top 25, but the rest of the RPI vs polls stuff is you and someone else. I concede that the polls aren’t perfect, but obviously the RPI isn’t perfect either, which is why the NCAA is pulling away from it. If you want to go by RPI, cool, Dartmouth is #22. But according to everyone else, they weren’t in the top 25.

[Anonymous]

It all depends on why you are doing this. My daughters are younger but will be hoping for D1 spots in the next few years and my primary goal is to get them into the best possible academic institutions to set them up career wise. Once they’re in college I don’t care if they ever win another lacrosse game, their lacrosse careers will end in college and their professional ones will start soon after and go for another 40 years. If one of my girls could go to Dartmouth, which has an excellent reputation and network that helps them professionally, I would send them in a heartbeat.

You said it all.. "My goal is" and "I don't care"... Does what your daughter want mean anything to you? Are you going to fill out their application? Go on their job interview. Call their employer?

[Anonymous]

OMG, give it a rest, people! Please take this argument elsewhere - no one else cares (or very few do) nor do they want to see post after post about it. Let's focus on 2027 girls commits, please.

[Anonymous]

Any actual commits news?