Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Freshmen committing to college seems ridiculous, indeed. Just heard that there is a Landon freshmen who has comitted to UVA as of this week. Strange but true apparently.
Is this the new norm?

Just because a freshman commits to a college, doesn't mean that that college has recruited him/her or ever will. As a high school freshman, I committed to going to Princeton, but by senior year, I wasn't good enough to get in. Freshmen/Sophomores/Juniors can announce they are committing to a school, even though that school's coach has not contacted them. College coaches cannot initiate personal contact or make a scholarship offer to any athlete until June 1 before the athlete's senior year. The fact that a high school underclassman commits only tells the college that he/she is very interested in attending that school and alerts the school to that fact. The college admissions department can then send out admissions brochures and other information about the school that they send to all interested potential applicants and begin the STUDENT recruitment process. At that point, the athlete is being recruited as a student, not as an athlete. The coaches at the college can monitor the player's progress through high school and decide whether to offer the player a scholarship or not.

A student-athlete can commit to a college, but the college and its coaches do not automatically commit to the student.

My son has played with Sam Offutt, the kid who committed to Starsia and UVA. His commitment to UVA is reciprocal and legit. You are correct that college coaches cannot INITIATE contact prior to the summer before the kid's freshman year. Offutt, however, along with two other 2016 kids have committed to D1 programs. As long as the kid is calling the coach, it is permissible.

There are three 2016 kids who have committed to D1 programs. It is an insane development, for sure, but this is not the case where a kid says "I'm going to UVA" in his own mind. Even if a kid were to do sure, the announcement would get pulled after prompting by either his HS coach, his club coach and/or the college in question.

Offutt's commitment to UVA is legit.

Anonymous wrote:youth specialization in a single sport is a disease that needs to be stamped out by thoughtful parents. Repeatedly using the same muscles and joints in the same manner throughout the year is the foundation for chronic injuries.

depends on the sport. Sports like tennis (especially girls') and soccer require specialization if you want any chance of attempting a professional career due to the development curve in relation to age.

is it just the economic factor or are there other reasons why most 'elite' lax players seem to be way bigger assholes compared to ultra elite basketball, football, and baseball talents that I've interacted with throughout my life.

There almost seemed to be a positive correlation (between talent/chance to go 'pro' in your sport and 'niceness').

Anonymous wrote:Freshmen committing to college seems ridiculous, indeed. Just heard that there is a Landon freshmen who has comitted to UVA as of this week. Strange but true apparently.
Is this the new norm?

Just because a freshman commits to a college, doesn't mean that that college has recruited him/her or ever will. As a high school freshman, I committed to going to Princeton, but by senior year, I wasn't good enough to get in. Freshmen/Sophomores/Juniors can announce they are committing to a school, even though that school's coach has not contacted them. College coaches cannot initiate personal contact or make a scholarship offer to any athlete until June 1 before the athlete's senior year. The fact that a high school underclassman commits only tells the college that he/she is very interested in attending that school and alerts the school to that fact. The college admissions department can then send out admissions brochures and other information about the school that they send to all interested potential applicants and begin the STUDENT recruitment process. At that point, the athlete is being recruited as a student, not as an athlete. The coaches at the college can monitor the player's progress through high school and decide whether to offer the player a scholarship or not.

A student-athlete can commit to a college, but the college and its coaches do not automatically commit to the student.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private schools seem prevalent on these commitment lists. Do they feed to the schools through prior relationships or do the better players just gravitate to the private schools?

I think it is both. Since the privates(at least here) have the reputations of having better lacrosse programs, kids with that interest tend to be with coaches and/or teammates that are at area privates. Public School programs and schools outside of the Northeast are getting better so there may be some changes coming down the road.

There is some gravitation of private school laxers to the better private school programs.

But the real reason for the private school superiority over the publics and many privates is "who" plays.

If you were to take the top 10 athletes at any public school (speed, size, agility, etc., etc), how many of them are playing lacrosse? The answer is almost none of them. These programs have been a place second or third tier athletes have gone to get a varsity letter. And stick skills have isolated them from better athletes who might want to pick the game up in high school.

Now ask that question about Landon or Prep. How many of their best athletes play lacrosse? The answer is a lot of them.

GP caught Landon by steadily improving the quality of players it got from it's own applicant pool / student body. In year's past GP didn't have the FB QB or WR's or LBs playing lacrosse. Nor were there any basketball players. When that started to change in the mid-1990's, it all changed for GP.

So does the school provide for exposure for their players to be recruited? I thought that was done at the club level, in which case the public school players could still get noticed.

Public school player, unless they are truly outstanding, are at a disadvantage given how recruiting really works.

The large Summer camps --- which are extremely profitable for those that run them --- are a place someone might get noticed. But, they tend to favor certain types of players.

The real grist of recruiting includes:

1. Input from established coaches --- Colleges talking to and working with high school coaches with whom they have a history and where mutual credibility has been built up over a period of years. The HS coaches who see their players everyday and who scout their opponents have a much better understanding and the colleges depend upon them. When guy's like Landon's Bordley speak, UVA and others listen. Colleges, of course, are wary of new HS coaches who want to see their players recruited. so a sales effort by these coaches doesn't have much impact.

2. College scouting of league games --- schools want to see how players perform in actual games, whether in person or on film. In person opportunities are limited because of the in-season schedule. But you are more likely to see college coaches at a Landon v. GP game than you are at a public school match.

3. The college camps are the best place for a school to see a prospect. Not the "meat markets", but the camp that is run by the college coach and his school.

4. The Tale of the Tape --- size, strength, athleticism will have a significant role to play. The college game is faster and rougher. Some schools seem to recruit primarily physical specimens (Duke?)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The good players will get noticed.

In this area, simply being a good player for your HS (especially a public one) is not enough. You need to either be playing for a club that gets looks and/or attending individual recruiting camps in the summer/fall.

So anyone can attend the recruiting camps, or are they by invitation only?

The best ones are invitation only, and you have to be nominated by your HS and/or club coach. Some camps get a lot of college coaches in attendance; many others do not. There are other factors as well (e.g. location of the camp, some camps are more focused for certain class year, some are focused on particular college divisions, etc.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The good players will get noticed.

In this area, simply being a good player for your HS (especially a public one) is not enough. You need to either be playing for a club that gets looks and/or attending individual recruiting camps in the summer/fall.

So anyone can attend the recruiting camps, or are they by invitation only?

Anonymous wrote:The good players will get noticed.

In this area, simply being a good player for your HS (especially a public one) is not enough. You need to either be playing for a club that gets looks and/or attending individual recruiting camps in the summer/fall.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private schools seem prevalent on these commitment lists. Do they feed to the schools through prior relationships or do the better players just gravitate to the private schools?

I think it is both. Since the privates(at least here) have the reputations of having better lacrosse programs, kids with that interest tend to be with coaches and/or teammates that are at area privates. Public School programs and schools outside of the Northeast are getting better so there may be some changes coming down the road.

There is some gravitation of private school laxers to the better private school programs.

But the real reason for the private school superiority over the publics and many privates is "who" plays.

If you were to take the top 10 athletes at any public school (speed, size, agility, etc., etc), how many of them are playing lacrosse? The answer is almost none of them. These programs have been a place second or third tier athletes have gone to get a varsity letter. And stick skills have isolated them from better athletes who might want to pick the game up in high school.

Now ask that question about Landon or Prep. How many of their best athletes play lacrosse? The answer is a lot of them.

GP caught Landon by steadily improving the quality of players it got from it's own applicant pool / student body. In year's past GP didn't have the FB QB or WR's or LBs playing lacrosse. Nor were there any basketball players. When that started to change in the mid-1990's, it all changed for GP.

So does the school provide for exposure for their players to be recruited? I thought that was done at the club level, in which case the public school players could still get noticed.

Many off the privates have summer teams starting in ms that go to tournaments together in the summer. There is also training during the school year that privates have for the lacrosse teams. Many of the HS coaches also provide support for recruiting.

The good players will get noticed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private schools seem prevalent on these commitment lists. Do they feed to the schools through prior relationships or do the better players just gravitate to the private schools?

I think it is both. Since the privates(at least here) have the reputations of having better lacrosse programs, kids with that interest tend to be with coaches and/or teammates that are at area privates. Public School programs and schools outside of the Northeast are getting better so there may be some changes coming down the road.

There is some gravitation of private school laxers to the better private school programs.

But the real reason for the private school superiority over the publics and many privates is "who" plays.

If you were to take the top 10 athletes at any public school (speed, size, agility, etc., etc), how many of them are playing lacrosse? The answer is almost none of them. These programs have been a place second or third tier athletes have gone to get a varsity letter. And stick skills have isolated them from better athletes who might want to pick the game up in high school.

Now ask that question about Landon or Prep. How many of their best athletes play lacrosse? The answer is a lot of them.

GP caught Landon by steadily improving the quality of players it got from it's own applicant pool / student body. In year's past GP didn't have the FB QB or WR's or LBs playing lacrosse. Nor were there any basketball players. When that started to change in the mid-1990's, it all changed for GP.

So does the school provide for exposure for their players to be recruited? I thought that was done at the club level, in which case the public school players could still get noticed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private schools seem prevalent on these commitment lists. Do they feed to the schools through prior relationships or do the better players just gravitate to the private schools?

I think it is both. Since the privates(at least here) have the reputations of having better lacrosse programs, kids with that interest tend to be with coaches and/or teammates that are at area privates. Public School programs and schools outside of the Northeast are getting better so there may be some changes coming down the road.

There is some gravitation of private school laxers to the better private school programs.

But the real reason for the private school superiority over the publics and many privates is "who" plays.

If you were to take the top 10 athletes at any public school (speed, size, agility, etc., etc), how many of them are playing lacrosse? The answer is almost none of them. These programs have been a place second or third tier athletes have gone to get a varsity letter. And stick skills have isolated them from better athletes who might want to pick the game up in high school.

Now ask that question about Landon or Prep. How many of their best athletes play lacrosse? The answer is a lot of them.

GP caught Landon by steadily improving the quality of players it got from it's own applicant pool / student body. In year's past GP didn't have the FB QB or WR's or LBs playing lacrosse. Nor were there any basketball players. When that started to change in the mid-1990's, it all changed for GP.

Anonymous wrote:Private schools seem prevalent on these commitment lists. Do they feed to the schools through prior relationships or do the better players just gravitate to the private schools?

I think it is both. Since the privates(at least here) have the reputations of having better lacrosse programs, kids with that interest tend to be with coaches and/or teammates that are at area privates. Public School programs and schools outside of the Northeast are getting better so there may be some changes coming down the road.

In my son's class, some boys committed before their junior year started. One kid who was unrecruited got into to several very good D-1 schools which had lax programs. He walked on with the coach's support and has logged more playing time than of his HS classmates.

Some kids who were real hot shots in middle school years couldn't make teams and have moved on. Freshman recruiting is a real crap shoot.

Private schools seem prevalent on these commitment lists. Do they feed to the schools through prior relationships or do the better players just gravitate to the private schools?