I'm a parent of one of the kids who left ML to DCE. The total body count in the move was 9 (as mentioned above, 2 also went to NL). The total roster was 18 or 19. There were numerous reasons why the kids left:

1. Cost -- ML is the most expensive club as far as I know. Parents were getting fed up with the ROI. We were entering tournaments that were just stupid (Vail and Orlando over new years). ML28s had a high propensity to only enter tournaments that had a positive impact on the bottom line of the ML organization. There are many great tournaments in the DMV and we would be heading off to CT or some other location because it was an NL affiliated gathering, for example. Also, even if you were a member of the everyday regional team, families were charged an additional $450.00 for EVERY national tournament. Given our "national" team was 85+% our regional team this got to the point of absurdity. This was an issue, but not "the" issue.

2. Coaching Style -- Players on ML 28 have literally zero freedom to make real time decisions. Everything...and I do mean everything... is directed from the coach to the players in real time. I'm sure all of you have heard CM screaming from the sidelines like a lunatic. Well, try being a kid getting pounded by a pole hearing your name being said in vain because you didn't perform exactly the way it was commanded and, of course, the threat of being pulled from the field if you make a mistake (unless you are of course his kid, which means mistakes don't matter). You are immediately pulled from the field, benched and berated. Some kids/parents are okay with this, some are not.

2b. It was the coach's way, always. He didn't want to hear from the kids or parents. This summer was an absolute disaster for the ML28s. We didn't win a single tournament. The previous year we won NLF with the same group of players. That's not sore loser-talk. That's the truth. Even when the coach got into some trouble in Vail and was kicked out of the tournament and couldn't coach a game or 2 and missed games at Naptown there was no explanation given to the parents as to why/where/or what the heck was going on. We are just suppose to eat it, I guess. But his behavior this summer was clearly the straw that broke the camel's back because several outspoken allies had repeatedly tried to tell him he needs to talk to the parents....there are a lot of problems brewing, etc etc. Nothing.

3. Playing Time. This is always an issue for teams, but wasn't a huge issue on ML28s because the roster was small. However, the coach likes fly ins. While the fly-in banter about ML28 is pretty overblown (we usually only had 1 to 3 players at any given national tournament), they did get a lot of time on the field even though they were of the same caliber of the existing players. CM really likes the next big thing and he gives them a long leash. Existing players, not so much. This is a universal problem within club lacrosse, but the majority of the parents called his bluff on it and he lost bigtime.

ML28s had a pretty good parent ground and most of the kids remain friends. I can tell you with a high degree of conviction that the kids who stayed are not very happy that they did, and I am expecting a few more of the remaining players to head for greener pastures this spring. How do I know? The parents told me. I don't know how the ML28s are going to be this year, and to be honest, I don't really care. I do know that every kid and parent who left for DCE and NL are relieved to not be in the ML pressure-cooker. As for their current roster size...they have several flyin players listed on that roster and there are near zero percent odds they will play for ML again given the meltdown this summer because they witnessed it too.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know about VA rec but the MD rec programs I believe become not competitive after basically 3/4 grade. It’s interesting bc in hockey that’s not the case - house hockey has good kids on it pretty much until they can’t play house anymore and I think it’s bc their parents don’t want to commit or pay for travel hockey. I wish MD rec lax stayed competitive too.

At one time rec lacrosse in MoCo AA and Howard was great. The club guys killed it by creating the HOCO league. MD still has elite players but is not growing. Looks like NOVA is starring at a similar outcome.

I don’t know about VA rec but the MD rec programs I believe become not competitive after basically 3/4 grade. It’s interesting bc in hockey that’s not the case - house hockey has good kids on it pretty much until they can’t play house anymore and I think it’s bc their parents don’t want to commit or pay for travel hockey. I wish MD rec lax stayed competitive too.

all true. one of the top 2025's on Madlax/Landon just committed to Princeton and he played for years in the Great Falls rec program. lots of great lacrosse in certain NVYLL programs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's weird that lacrosse is growing nationally but it does feel like it's contracting locally.

The local rec leagues like the one in NoVa are the feeders to the club programs. They suffered a big setback during COVID. I suspect that is playing a big part in the 28-32 age groups who missed a year of it. And I’m hearing the rec leagues are not what they were up till just prior to COVID. Those championship games in the AAA level of NVYLL were pretty much 100% kids from the Elite programs in the DMV. Great competition.

The clubs all started playing in the HOCO league and many of the better players stopped playing NVYLL or those that did only showed up for games. The end result is that the clubs are not developing players and NVYLL used to do that. The rec team also brought more athletic kids to the game. COVID was a part of this but I think club lacrosse is the culprit. Paying $3500 per year vs $350 per year and not getting the same level of coaching and this is the result. Less kids equals less competition and less development. You hear club coaches tell kids not to play rec. Don't bite the hand.....

Not following this at all. Rec teams through NVYLL still exist, so it's not like kids who don't want to pay for club can't get an introduction, exposure, and chance to develop at the sport. Rec is still here, like it always has been. Who cares if the better players prefer to play with other better players through club lacrosse?

I've never seen an "AAA" NVYLL team with anywhere near 100% elite program kids. Maybe a handful IF that team is fortunate, and then a huge drop off in skill for the rest of the roster. For Elite level kids, rec isn't that fun, and most (nearly all?) would choose to not play rec, it's much more fun to play with better players across the entire roster. Parents/Dads do like to chase rec league bragging rights and the opportunity to fulfill their coaching desires through getting involved with coaching their kids rec team, so some elite level kids still play rec.

The 14U Mclean and Dulles South teams are literally ALL Elite Boco kids. They all play for Madlax, DCE and Nezt Level, with some of the Dulles South kids playing for VLC, Hammers and Top Caliber.

Vast majority of the rosters on the better Madlax teams are from VA. Potomac Falls/Sterling was a real hotbed for 25 amd 26 Madlax teams, and Vienna with the 28 Madlax team. Of these kids stayed public Vs going to Landon, St John’s, Prep, and Gonzaga— those HS teams would be super legit. Alas, they do not.

Rec is a great place to develop for sure… it’s cheap, it’s not toxic, and it’s competitive at every level on a relative basis. At least in the NVYLL.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's weird that lacrosse is growing nationally but it does feel like it's contracting locally.

The local rec leagues like the one in NoVa are the feeders to the club programs. They suffered a big setback during COVID. I suspect that is playing a big part in the 28-32 age groups who missed a year of it. And I’m hearing the rec leagues are not what they were up till just prior to COVID. Those championship games in the AAA level of NVYLL were pretty much 100% kids from the Elite programs in the DMV. Great competition.

The clubs all started playing in the HOCO league and many of the better players stopped playing NVYLL or those that did only showed up for games. The end result is that the clubs are not developing players and NVYLL used to do that. The rec team also brought more athletic kids to the game. COVID was a part of this but I think club lacrosse is the culprit. Paying $3500 per year vs $350 per year and not getting the same level of coaching and this is the result. Less kids equals less competition and less development. You hear club coaches tell kids not to play rec. Don't bite the hand.....

Not following this at all. Rec teams through NVYLL still exist, so it's not like kids who don't want to pay for club can't get an introduction, exposure, and chance to develop at the sport. Rec is still here, like it always has been. Who cares if the better players prefer to play with other better players through club lacrosse?

I've never seen an "AAA" NVYLL team with anywhere near 100% elite program kids. Maybe a handful IF that team is fortunate, and then a huge drop off in skill for the rest of the roster. For Elite level kids, rec isn't that fun, and most (nearly all?) would choose to not play rec, it's much more fun to play with better players across the entire roster. Parents/Dads do like to chase rec league bragging rights and the opportunity to fulfill their coaching desires through getting involved with coaching their kids rec team, so some elite level kids still play rec.

You are not following this logic because you probably never excelled at a team sport and did not play lacrosse growing up. Either way, the comment and critique of the current system is that fewer elite players are coming out of the DMV in recent years and that is easy to see if you follow the recent recruiting trends. By the way being on an "elite" HOCO league team does not make a player elite. The conversation was around a much lower number of D1 recruits in the DMV region despite growth in other areas of the country. One fairly recent trend is the fact that most clubs now for go NVYLL to play in HOCO and tell kids not to play NVYLL. The old NVYLL teams were much stronger so if you are basing your comments on current NVYLL teams that would be correct. However, to say it is not "fun" to play rec is the fault of the greater lacrosse community. Playing with friends is what is fun. Representing future HS is fun. If the option to pay $3500-$5000 per year was not an option and every kid played rec, rec would still be fun. The problem is not parents/dads chasing glory the problem is parents/dads who want to make a living off youth sports and turn it into a business instead of getting a real job. Either way, the point is that the current model is NOT producing better players and for the first time ever lacrosse is a shrinking sport in the DMV.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's weird that lacrosse is growing nationally but it does feel like it's contracting locally.

The local rec leagues like the one in NoVa are the feeders to the club programs. They suffered a big setback during COVID. I suspect that is playing a big part in the 28-32 age groups who missed a year of it. And I’m hearing the rec leagues are not what they were up till just prior to COVID. Those championship games in the AAA level of NVYLL were pretty much 100% kids from the Elite programs in the DMV. Great competition.

The clubs all started playing in the HOCO league and many of the better players stopped playing NVYLL or those that did only showed up for games. The end result is that the clubs are not developing players and NVYLL used to do that. The rec team also brought more athletic kids to the game. COVID was a part of this but I think club lacrosse is the culprit. Paying $3500 per year vs $350 per year and not getting the same level of coaching and this is the result. Less kids equals less competition and less development. You hear club coaches tell kids not to play rec. Don't bite the hand.....

Not following this at all. Rec teams through NVYLL still exist, so it's not like kids who don't want to pay for club can't get an introduction, exposure, and chance to develop at the sport. Rec is still here, like it always has been. Who cares if the better players prefer to play with other better players through club lacrosse?

I've never seen an "AAA" NVYLL team with anywhere near 100% elite program kids. Maybe a handful IF that team is fortunate, and then a huge drop off in skill for the rest of the roster. For Elite level kids, rec isn't that fun, and most (nearly all?) would choose to not play rec, it's much more fun to play with better players across the entire roster. Parents/Dads do like to chase rec league bragging rights and the opportunity to fulfill their coaching desires through getting involved with coaching their kids rec team, so some elite level kids still play rec.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The clubs, despite the increased costs, are not producing better players in greater numbers.

Facts. In particular, club owners in this area care more about collecting players than developing them, no matter how hard they push back on that. Proof is right there.

I hate to agree to this... My younger son would say it is like playing Pokemon......"Gotta catch them all"

I totally agree with this sentiment. All three of the big programs (ML, NL & DCE) are just throwing bodies on thier teams, with DCE being most egregious offender with 30 kids on their top team.

In defense of club - rec only provides 30 practices and 10 games at most. You can’t get competive even for a mid tier public school with that little exposure to lacrosse.

30 kids is too many kids for a team. Sounds like DCE was just trying to make it harder for the programs you mentioned...

They do have a "B" team also, right?

My understanding the B team has 26 players. But before you start throwing stones, a DCE I believe Nextlevel has 24 or more kids on each of their teams.

Next level as 30 as well. This kind of thing isn't good for the players

At least not until HS when most clubs carry 25-26 due to 3-4 bing out w injuries at any given time

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The clubs, despite the increased costs, are not producing better players in greater numbers.

Facts. In particular, club owners in this area care more about collecting players than developing them, no matter how hard they push back on that. Proof is right there.

I hate to agree to this... My younger son would say it is like playing Pokemon......"Gotta catch them all"

I totally agree with this sentiment. All three of the big programs (ML, NL & DCE) are just throwing bodies on thier teams, with DCE being most egregious offender with 30 kids on their top team.

In defense of club - rec only provides 30 practices and 10 games at most. You can’t get competive even for a mid tier public school with that little exposure to lacrosse.

DCE has 27 kids in the Black team, Madlax has 26 kids, NL is not public but I’m hearing it’s just as many as the 2 mentioned above

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The clubs, despite the increased costs, are not producing better players in greater numbers.

Facts. In particular, club owners in this area care more about collecting players than developing them, no matter how hard they push back on that. Proof is right there.

I hate to agree to this... My younger son would say it is like playing Pokemon......"Gotta catch them all"

I totally agree with this sentiment. All three of the big programs (ML, NL & DCE) are just throwing bodies on thier teams, with DCE being most egregious offender with 30 kids on their top team.

In defense of club - rec only provides 30 practices and 10 games at most. You can’t get competive even for a mid tier public school with that little exposure to lacrosse.

30 kids is too many kids for a team. Sounds like DCE was just trying to make it harder for the programs you mentioned...

They do have a "B" team also, right?

My understanding the B team has 26 players. But before you start throwing stones, a DCE I believe Nextlevel has 24 or more kids on each of their teams.

Next level as 30 as well. This kind of thing isn't good for the players

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The clubs, despite the increased costs, are not producing better players in greater numbers.

Facts. In particular, club owners in this area care more about collecting players than developing them, no matter how hard they push back on that. Proof is right there.

I hate to agree to this... My younger son would say it is like playing Pokemon......"Gotta catch them all"

I totally agree with this sentiment. All three of the big programs (ML, NL & DCE) are just throwing bodies on thier teams, with DCE being most egregious offender with 30 kids on their top team.

In defense of club - rec only provides 30 practices and 10 games at most. You can’t get competive even for a mid tier public school with that little exposure to lacrosse.

30 kids is too many kids for a team. Sounds like DCE was just trying to make it harder for the programs you mentioned...

They do have a "B" team also, right?

My understanding the B team has 26 players. But before you start throwing stones, a DCE I believe Nextlevel has 24 or more kids on each of their teams.

Then it is pretty much across the board then, gotcha.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The clubs, despite the increased costs, are not producing better players in greater numbers.

Facts. In particular, club owners in this area care more about collecting players than developing them, no matter how hard they push back on that. Proof is right there.

I hate to agree to this... My younger son would say it is like playing Pokemon......"Gotta catch them all"

I totally agree with this sentiment. All three of the big programs (ML, NL & DCE) are just throwing bodies on thier teams, with DCE being most egregious offender with 30 kids on their top team.

In defense of club - rec only provides 30 practices and 10 games at most. You can’t get competive even for a mid tier public school with that little exposure to lacrosse.

30 kids is too many kids for a team. Sounds like DCE was just trying to make it harder for the programs you mentioned...

They do have a "B" team also, right?

My understanding the B team has 26 players. But before you start throwing stones, a DCE I believe Nextlevel has 24 or more kids on each of their teams.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The clubs, despite the increased costs, are not producing better players in greater numbers.

Facts. In particular, club owners in this area care more about collecting players than developing them, no matter how hard they push back on that. Proof is right there.

I hate to agree to this... My younger son would say it is like playing Pokemon......"Gotta catch them all"

I totally agree with this sentiment. All three of the big programs (ML, NL & DCE) are just throwing bodies on thier teams, with DCE being most egregious offender with 30 kids on their top team.

In defense of club - rec only provides 30 practices and 10 games at most. You can’t get competive even for a mid tier public school with that little exposure to lacrosse.

30 kids is too many kids for a team. Sounds like DCE was just trying to make it harder for the programs you mentioned...

They do have a "B" team also, right?

Anonymous wrote:DS is an excellent player on a top 2028 team. Assuming he is as awesome as I say he is, should he expect to be offered "merit" money at a private high school (or schools) as an enticement to attend because of his lacrosse skills? Or is this crazy talk? He would not qualify for financial aid, nor merit aid based solely on academics. I've heard various stories over the years, but don't know what is true. What's the deal?

It really depends on the school. Truth is many great lacrosse players in the area do not need money so they just pay full tuition. Very few schools in the area are really "top" level programs who would care enough to even think about this. In any case, an "offer" would not be made. It would go like this: Coach asks if you are ready to attend and expresses interest. This is assuming you even meet with a coach. Coach may ask if there is any reason you would not attend. Parents would have to mention financial concerns and a coach may say "let me see what I can do." Some lacrosse coaches have zero sway with the school. Some work with or even for the school. I would not expect to get multiple offers.

DS is an excellent player on a top 2028 team. Assuming he is as awesome as I say he is, should he expect to be offered "merit" money at a private high school (or schools) as an enticement to attend because of his lacrosse skills? Or is this crazy talk? He would not qualify for financial aid, nor merit aid based solely on academics. I've heard various stories over the years, but don't know what is true. What's the deal?