Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it seems this thread is hoping that the 28s will have the same ending as the 25s and it’s simply not going to happen as there is less talent in the 28 group than the 25s. Capital is great but they can only go as far as the talent goes. Unless a bunch of Baltimore/annapolis girls decide to go to capital I don’t see the 28s being in the same range as the 25s.

Saying ANY team will not be #1 is playing it very safe. The wildcard continues to be the local players on MD teams. If they come home, 2028s will have a team.

Several things:

1) I don't see why the local girls (excluding current MD players) would not be a pretty good team. Heck, Pride is currently a top 20 team without a bunch of good local players, bot on other local teams as well as MD teams.

2) Adding the MD players would be even better, but not all of them are necessary components. With all due respect to everyone, not all of the MD players have the same talent and potential.

There is a tremendous difference b/w top 20 and top 5. Pride is a good team but that is it with respect to local talent and everyone knows it.

At 2028, it’s really the top 3 not top 5 that have separated themselves from the pack - at least based on Fall tournament play.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it seems this thread is hoping that the 28s will have the same ending as the 25s and it’s simply not going to happen as there is less talent in the 28 group than the 25s. Capital is great but they can only go as far as the talent goes. Unless a bunch of Baltimore/annapolis girls decide to go to capital I don’t see the 28s being in the same range as the 25s.

Saying ANY team will not be #1 is playing it very safe. The wildcard continues to be the local players on MD teams. If they come home, 2028s will have a team.

Several things:

1) I don't see why the local girls (excluding current MD players) would not be a pretty good team. Heck, Pride is currently a top 20 team without a bunch of good local players, bot on other local teams as well as MD teams.

2) Adding the MD players would be even better, but not all of them are necessary components. With all due respect to everyone, not all of the MD players have the same talent and potential.

There is a tremendous difference b/w top 20 and top 5. Pride is a good team but that is it with respect to local talent and everyone knows it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it seems this thread is hoping that the 28s will have the same ending as the 25s and it’s simply not going to happen as there is less talent in the 28 group than the 25s. Capital is great but they can only go as far as the talent goes. Unless a bunch of Baltimore/annapolis girls decide to go to capital I don’t see the 28s being in the same range as the 25s.

Saying ANY team will not be #1 is playing it very safe. The wildcard continues to be the local players on MD teams. If they come home, 2028s will have a team.

Several things:

1) I don't see why the local girls (excluding current MD players) would not be a pretty good team. Heck, Pride is currently a top 20 team without a bunch of good local players, bot on other local teams as well as MD teams.

2) Adding the MD players would be even better, but not all of them are necessary components. With all due respect to everyone, not all of the MD players have the same talent and potential.

Again a wild card. No guarantee. How many are we talking anyway. I’d be surprised if those girls come back. Unless something isn’t working out for them and that isn’t great. Then there’s the mix of the team.

Anonymous wrote:Well, it seems this thread is hoping that the 28s will have the same ending as the 25s and it’s simply not going to happen as there is less talent in the 28 group than the 25s. Capital is great but they can only go as far as the talent goes. Unless a bunch of Baltimore/annapolis girls decide to go to capital I don’t see the 28s being in the same range as the 25s.

Saying ANY team will not be #1 is playing it very safe. The wildcard continues to be the local players on MD teams. If they come home, 2028s will have a team.

Well, it seems this thread is hoping that the 28s will have the same ending as the 25s and it’s simply not going to happen as there is less talent in the 28 group than the 25s. Capital is great but they can only go as far as the talent goes. Unless a bunch of Baltimore/annapolis girls decide to go to capital I don’t see the 28s being in the same range as the 25s.

Anonymous wrote:I just checked who ended up #15 last year for the 2025s. CT Grizzlies had the same ranking but today have commits to UVA, ND, Duke, Richmond, Columbia, Cornell, Villanova, W&M, Lehigh, UC-Davis, USC, Dartmouth x2, and Colgate x3. Is that comparable to the Pride 23s?

Who cares? This is a 2028 thread.

I just checked who ended up #15 last year for the 2025s. CT Grizzlies had the same ranking but today have commits to UVA, ND, Duke, Richmond, Columbia, Cornell, Villanova, W&M, Lehigh, UC-Davis, USC, Dartmouth x2, and Colgate x3. Is that comparable to the Pride 23s?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren’t the Pride 28’s ranked #14 in the country? That isn’t average.

I probably would not hang my hat on a fall ranking, but point taken. Recent competitive play against top teams puts them in a tier well above average. Prior Pride teams have followed the same model, slowly improving over the years and peaking in 8th grade before being decimated by a Capital exodus.

Many Pride 25s, 26s and 27s left for Capital because they saw the 23s and 24s (who elected to stay together at Pride HS) generate underwhelming recruiting results. 24s were already in the Pride pipeline by the time the window opened for the 23s, but the 25s saw what happened to the 23s in real time and led the Capital exodus that’s happened since.

This is exactly what happened. I feel bad for the 2023 families who made the commitment to stay with Pride that year and help KM launch her HS program. Some bad luck with the club’s recruiting director leaving at a key time to take a head coaching job at American, coupled with a really bad replacement hire. Without the recruiting history of Capital and really no direction provided to those families on how to work the recruiting process it took longer than it should have for talent on that team to commit. That 2023 team was loaded, had some of the best talent in that class, and was very competitive in the highest brackets. I believe the team had 3-4 High School Players of the Year on it from various private and public school programs and many All Mets. The way KM handled that class killed the future of her high school program.

Several factors hurt the Pride Black 23s (PB23). The team played a 13th ranked SoS its second year, the most important year, and with that easier schedule ended the year at #15. They didn’t play in many of the same tournaments as Capital, and didn’t receive as much exposure as a result. It wasn’t until PB23s third year that it played a 2nd ranked SoS, but by that point the wave of the recruiting season had passed. PB23 slipped seven places with that jump in schedule strength and ended with a #24 ranking at a time when it needed to play its hardest in front of coaches to get their players committed.

The point that PB23 families were duped by KM isn’t entirely accurate. Those families knew they were joining a HS club with no recruiting history. They knew it was an experiment to stay with Pride. They knew they were betting on a horse with no track data. The timing of the PB23 recruiting director who left mid year was unfortunate. But PB23 families knew she had been away from the D1 coaching world for six years, and was a high school coach and youth club director / owner during that time. They also knew (or should have based on an IG search) that her club didn’t have a robust record of committing players to big schools and programs.

There just wasn’t a body of work to suggest PB23 recruiting would be successful even if the RD had stayed. It takes a lot more than putting a good product on the field and someone with a recruiting director title to be successful -- it takes years of relationships built on trust. Of course KM wanted the 23s to remain with the club, but the families shoulder some of the blame. It’s their job to help the player make decisions that will serve their best interests. The families were the ones who made the conscious / unified choice to stay with Pride. It was on them to ask themselves whether doing so put their players in the best position to be successful.

The last paragraph is spot on:

"All of this set the tone for how future classes view Pride. A big miss on KMs part, but I suspect she is just fine collecting a lot of checks from her elementary and MS parents and serving as a feeder for Capital. It’s a business for her and not about college commitments."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren’t the Pride 28’s ranked #14 in the country? That isn’t average.

I probably would not hang my hat on a fall ranking, but point taken. Recent competitive play against top teams puts them in a tier well above average. Prior Pride teams have followed the same model, slowly improving over the years and peaking in 8th grade before being decimated by a Capital exodus.

Many Pride 25s, 26s and 27s left for Capital because they saw the 23s and 24s (who elected to stay together at Pride HS) generate underwhelming recruiting results. 24s were already in the Pride pipeline by the time the window opened for the 23s, but the 25s saw what happened to the 23s in real time and led the Capital exodus that’s happened since.

This is exactly what happened. I feel bad for the 2023 families who made the commitment to stay with Pride that year and help KM launch her HS program. Some bad luck with the club’s recruiting director leaving at a key time to take a head coaching job at American, coupled with a really bad replacement hire. Without the recruiting history of Capital and really no direction provided to those families on how to work the recruiting process it took longer than it should have for talent on that team to commit. That 2023 team was loaded, had some of the best talent in that class, and was very competitive in the highest brackets. I believe the team had 3-4 High School Players of the Year on it from various private and public school programs and many All Mets. The way KM handled that class killed the future of her high school program.

A common theme I've heard amongst middle school parents with regards to clubs and recruiting is that just being on a top team and playing in the top brackets at the right tournaments is all you have to worry about from your club (not whether there is recruiting history or an experienced recruiting director). But what you're describing here about the Pride 2023s seems to prove otherwise?

You need them both. Capital and its former players have a history with college coaches, which helps open the recruiting conversation for future club players. Capital also helps guide families through a process they have been through many times. And is really good at it.

If your DD wants to play at the highest level in college, coaches will want to see them play against the best competition, so playing in the top brackets is important. Those high school years both Pride and Capital played top 5 schedules. And it definitely helped get players noticed, but I don’t think Pride had the connections or processes in place to execute and take advantage of playing at this high level.

Pride had some great talent that year, but families could not have anticipated Lindsey Teeters leaving for American and KM having no connections to open doors. Add to this the club had no former players to mentor players through the recruiting process. This slowed recruiting for some very talented players. That team’s top players did land at good programs, but the lack of support was also frustrating for others who simply gave up on playing.

All of this set the tone for how future classes view Pride. A big miss on KMs part, but I suspect she is just fine collecting a lot of checks from her elementary and MS parents and serving as a feeder for Capital. It’s a business for her and not about college commitments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with OP that Pride doesn’t do much development and has many poor coaches. Playing the top teams in Baltimore (and always getting beat) does help players grow though so there is that.

Pride isn't a great program, but considering the alternatives, it’s probably number 1 for middle school girls lacrosse. That says more about how weak the other programs are than how great Pride is..

Well said here. Pride is the top for MS but also not a very good club compared to the top Baltimore clubs. The rest of the DMV clubs are even weaker.

Okay...so the conclusion here is that Pride is not as good as Hero's and M&D. So enlightening. Neither are any other clubs...anywhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with OP that Pride doesn’t do much development and has many poor coaches. Playing the top teams in Baltimore (and always getting beat) does help players grow though so there is that.

Pride isn't a great program, but considering the alternatives, it’s probably number 1 for middle school girls lacrosse. That says more about how weak the other programs are than how great Pride is..

Well said here. Pride is the top for MS but also not a very good club compared to the top Baltimore clubs. The rest of the DMV clubs are even weaker.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren’t the Pride 28’s ranked #14 in the country? That isn’t average.

I probably would not hang my hat on a fall ranking, but point taken. Recent competitive play against top teams puts them in a tier well above average. Prior Pride teams have followed the same model, slowly improving over the years and peaking in 8th grade before being decimated by a Capital exodus.

Many Pride 25s, 26s and 27s left for Capital because they saw the 23s and 24s (who elected to stay together at Pride HS) generate underwhelming recruiting results. 24s were already in the Pride pipeline by the time the window opened for the 23s, but the 25s saw what happened to the 23s in real time and led the Capital exodus that’s happened since.

This is exactly what happened. I feel bad for the 2023 families who made the commitment to stay with Pride that year and help KM launch her HS program. Some bad luck with the club’s recruiting director leaving at a key time to take a head coaching job at American, coupled with a really bad replacement hire. Without the recruiting history of Capital and really no direction provided to those families on how to work the recruiting process it took longer than it should have for talent on that team to commit. That 2023 team was loaded, had some of the best talent in that class, and was very competitive in the highest brackets. I believe the team had 3-4 High School Players of the Year on it from various private and public school programs and many All Mets. The way KM handled that class killed the future of her high school program.

A common theme I've heard amongst middle school parents with regards to clubs and recruiting is that just being on a top team and playing in the top brackets at the right tournaments is all you have to worry about from your club (not whether there is recruiting history or an experienced recruiting director). But what you're describing here about the Pride 2023s seems to prove otherwise?

For MS, playing in the top brackets at the right tournaments is important. For HS, an estrablished recruiting machine is important too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren’t the Pride 28’s ranked #14 in the country? That isn’t average.

I probably would not hang my hat on a fall ranking, but point taken. Recent competitive play against top teams puts them in a tier well above average. Prior Pride teams have followed the same model, slowly improving over the years and peaking in 8th grade before being decimated by a Capital exodus.

Many Pride 25s, 26s and 27s left for Capital because they saw the 23s and 24s (who elected to stay together at Pride HS) generate underwhelming recruiting results. 24s were already in the Pride pipeline by the time the window opened for the 23s, but the 25s saw what happened to the 23s in real time and led the Capital exodus that’s happened since.

This is exactly what happened. I feel bad for the 2023 families who made the commitment to stay with Pride that year and help KM launch her HS program. Some bad luck with the club’s recruiting director leaving at a key time to take a head coaching job at American, coupled with a really bad replacement hire. Without the recruiting history of Capital and really no direction provided to those families on how to work the recruiting process it took longer than it should have for talent on that team to commit. That 2023 team was loaded, had some of the best talent in that class, and was very competitive in the highest brackets. I believe the team had 3-4 High School Players of the Year on it from various private and public school programs and many All Mets. The way KM handled that class killed the future of her high school program.

A common theme I've heard amongst middle school parents with regards to clubs and recruiting is that just being on a top team and playing in the top brackets at the right tournaments is all you have to worry about from your club (not whether there is recruiting history or an experienced recruiting director). But what you're describing here about the Pride 2023s seems to prove otherwise?