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.

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!

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.

I never said they were terrible, I said that they weren’t great and wouldn’t use a kid’s commitment there as a barometer of the Cap program’s potential recruiting success this year, directly answering a question asked of me.

Their previous classes weren’t great, hence the finishing second to last in the Ivy League. Getting a couple of ranked kids in back to back classes is great, but you need depth too. The lack of depth is why they were “bleeding out” against stronger, deeper teams. So congrats to the Cap Orange player, she nailed her college choice, but that isn’t a sign that Capital is going to have 25 or 26 levels success this cycle.

Nobody asked you to make it a barometer of Cap's potential recruiting success this year, you made that all up in your head in order to downplay a recruit's commitment for some strange reason with quasi-crazy takes.
You said they weren't very good. Does that usually mean they just didn't make the "very good" cutoff? No, it means they're "bad" in your view.
Their '25 class alone has a 5* and 4 4*s among the 8 they're bringing in. That's not "a couple" (a couple is 2) for your vaunted star ratings. You said they got smashed by everyone decent. That's a lie. Getting smashed isn't being in the game in the 4th with top 5 teams plural.
Or a 1 goal game with Brown. Or beating a top 20 UMass. Or beating a Cornell team that ran with the best in the Ivy all year.

And again... you were never posed to calibrate the commitment to Capital's success this cycle for anything, much leas vs '25 or '26. The poster wondered what you thought of the commitment. That's all. Thanks for showing us what your knowledge of the landscape is.

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

Directed towards me because of what I said about the 2027 Cap Blue team. And I have said over and over that Dartmouth has picked up a few good recruits the past two cycles, kudos to them. But then the rest of the classes are filled with marginal D1 girls like one that would play for the #61 ranked club team, and that’s exactly why they can’t keep up with better teams. Relax, Dartmouth mom, your kid is an academic superstar and will do well in life.

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!

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a player hasn’t heard at all from a school on September 1 does that mean they’ll never hear from them? In other words, do schools call all the players they are interested in on September 1 regardless of whether they make offers on that first call - and just work their way down as girls accept or decline?

Coaches have tier lists, and they try to get top tier kids to commit early. Some do, some wait and take their visits before deciding. As the coaches develop the relationship, they gauge interest and move on to other recruits if it doesn’t work out. Kids will also decommit and the process will shake out around the middle of the school year.

Ok but do they call everyone from all their tiers on September 1? So players know on September 1 all the schools that are interested in them (to some degree) at once?

That depends on the coach/program, but generally they reach out to all of the kids they are interested in right away, but the top kids are offered the visits and potential scholarship packages first. They want to keep the tier 2 and 3 kids on the line in case they whiff on a tier 1 kid. That said, I wouldn’t freak out if your kid isn’t getting calls/texts/emails right away; it’s a marathon, not a sprint.

It’s possible then a girl could accept an offer from a school lower down on her list and then get a call a couple weeks later from a school she. wanted more but who was lower on their list and didn’t call her right away.

Is it common for a player to get an offer and accept and then hear from a better school later and change their minds?

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.

I never said they were terrible, I said that they weren’t great and wouldn’t use a kid’s commitment there as a barometer of the Cap program’s potential recruiting success this year, directly answering a question asked of me.

Their previous classes weren’t great, hence the finishing second to last in the Ivy League. Getting a couple of ranked kids in back to back classes is great, but you need depth too. The lack of depth is why they were “bleeding out” against stronger, deeper teams. So congrats to the Cap Orange player, she nailed her college choice, but that isn’t a sign that Capital is going to have 25 or 26 levels success this cycle.

Ivy League was second only to ACC as the most competitive league in the nation last year. Coming in toward the bottom doesn’t say anything. Is ND not a good team for coming in close to the bottom of the ACC? It’s fun watching you lose this argument

It does say something, it says that the teams ahead of you recruited better players. So again, Dartmouth is wonderful and has attracted a few decent players recently, but one player from Orange committing there doesn’t say anything about Cap’s recruiting success this cycle. Where else was this kid considering? She might just be a tier 3 kid who never plays at all, which is not unlikely given that Orange is #61. Regarding ND, they did not have a good year last year, you know they were 7-8, right? Clearly a better program overall compared to Dartmouth, but they didn’t have a great year and finished where they deserved to finish.

Dude, Dartmouth and ND are both top 20 national universities with insane alumni networks. Many kids would sacrifice a younger sibling to get in to either. The Cap Orange player hit a home run. Give it a rest.

I agree, amazing pick, never said it wasn’t.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have one 5 star, one 4 star, and another that should probably be a 4 star. So 3.

That process is very objective and historically accurate...thank you for your expert insight.

I think they pulled the information from here, where an “expert” has ranked one player a 5 star and another a 4:
https://www.insidelacrosse.com/recruiting/club/team/Capital+2027+Blue/15785/2025

For the sake of comparison, #1 M&D has
3 five stars and 4 four stars.
https://www.insidelacrosse.com/recruiting/club/team/M%26D+2027+Black/14307/2025

Why doesn't IL list the full roster of each club?

Because you have to pay IL hundreds of dollars to be evaluated for a star ranking

They not lying

So is there a player out there who actually deserves 5 or 4 stars but didn't pay IL? Would IL completely ignore a plyaer who didn't do the evaluation?

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.

I never said they were terrible, I said that they weren’t great and wouldn’t use a kid’s commitment there as a barometer of the Cap program’s potential recruiting success this year, directly answering a question asked of me.

Their previous classes weren’t great, hence the finishing second to last in the Ivy League. Getting a couple of ranked kids in back to back classes is great, but you need depth too. The lack of depth is why they were “bleeding out” against stronger, deeper teams. So congrats to the Cap Orange player, she nailed her college choice, but that isn’t a sign that Capital is going to have 25 or 26 levels success this cycle.

Ivy League was second only to ACC as the most competitive league in the nation last year. Coming in toward the bottom doesn’t say anything. Is ND not a good team for coming in close to the bottom of the ACC? It’s fun watching you lose this argument

It does say something, it says that the teams ahead of you recruited better players. So again, Dartmouth is wonderful and has attracted a few decent players recently, but one player from Orange committing there doesn’t say anything about Cap’s recruiting success this cycle. Where else was this kid considering? She might just be a tier 3 kid who never plays at all, which is not unlikely given that Orange is #61. Regarding ND, they did not have a good year last year, you know they were 7-8, right? Clearly a better program overall compared to Dartmouth, but they didn’t have a great year and finished where they deserved to finish.

Dude, Dartmouth and ND are both top 20 national universities with insane alumni networks. Many kids would sacrifice a younger sibling to get in to either. The Cap Orange player hit a home run. Give it a rest.

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.

I never said they were terrible, I said that they weren’t great and wouldn’t use a kid’s commitment there as a barometer of the Cap program’s potential recruiting success this year, directly answering a question asked of me.

Their previous classes weren’t great, hence the finishing second to last in the Ivy League. Getting a couple of ranked kids in back to back classes is great, but you need depth too. The lack of depth is why they were “bleeding out” against stronger, deeper teams. So congrats to the Cap Orange player, she nailed her college choice, but that isn’t a sign that Capital is going to have 25 or 26 levels success this cycle.

Ivy League was second only to ACC as the most competitive league in the nation last year. Coming in toward the bottom doesn’t say anything. Is ND not a good team for coming in close to the bottom of the ACC? It’s fun watching you lose this argument

It does say something, it says that the teams ahead of you recruited better players. So again, Dartmouth is wonderful and has attracted a few decent players recently, but one player from Orange committing there doesn’t say anything about Cap’s recruiting success this cycle. Where else was this kid considering? She might just be a tier 3 kid who never plays at all, which is not unlikely given that Orange is #61. Regarding ND, they did not have a good year last year, you know they were 7-8, right? Clearly a better program overall compared to Dartmouth, but they didn’t have a great year and finished where they deserved to finish.

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.

I never said they were terrible, I said that they weren’t great and wouldn’t use a kid’s commitment there as a barometer of the Cap program’s potential recruiting success this year, directly answering a question asked of me.

Their previous classes weren’t great, hence the finishing second to last in the Ivy League. Getting a couple of ranked kids in back to back classes is great, but you need depth too. The lack of depth is why they were “bleeding out” against stronger, deeper teams. So congrats to the Cap Orange player, she nailed her college choice, but that isn’t a sign that Capital is going to have 25 or 26 levels success this cycle.

Ivy League was second only to ACC as the most competitive league in the nation last year. Coming in toward the bottom doesn’t say anything. Is ND not a good team for coming in close to the bottom of the ACC? It’s fun watching you lose this argument

It does say something, it says that the teams ahead of you recruited better players. So again, Dartmouth is wonderful and has attracted a few decent players recently, but one player from Orange committing there doesn’t say anything about Cap’s recruiting success this cycle. Where else was this kid considering? She might just be a tier 3 kid who never plays at all, which is not unlikely given that Orange is #61. Regarding ND, they did not have a good year last year, you know they were 7-8, right? Clearly a better program overall compared to Dartmouth, but they didn’t have a great year and finished where they deserved to finish.

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?

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.

I never said they were terrible, I said that they weren’t great and wouldn’t use a kid’s commitment there as a barometer of the Cap program’s potential recruiting success this year, directly answering a question asked of me.

Their previous classes weren’t great, hence the finishing second to last in the Ivy League. Getting a couple of ranked kids in back to back classes is great, but you need depth too. The lack of depth is why they were “bleeding out” against stronger, deeper teams. So congrats to the Cap Orange player, she nailed her college choice, but that isn’t a sign that Capital is going to have 25 or 26 levels success this cycle.

Nobody asked you to make it a barometer of Cap's potential recruiting success this year, you made that all up in your head in order to downplay a recruit's commitment for some strange reason with quasi-crazy takes.
You said they weren't very good. Does that usually mean they just didn't make the "very good" cutoff? No, it means they're "bad" in your view.
Their '25 class alone has a 5* and 4 4*s among the 8 they're bringing in. That's not "a couple" (a couple is 2) for your vaunted star ratings. You said they got smashed by everyone decent. That's a lie. Getting smashed isn't being in the game in the 4th with top 5 teams plural.
Or a 1 goal game with Brown. Or beating a top 20 UMass. Or beating a Cornell team that ran with the best in the Ivy all year.

And again... you were never posed to calibrate the commitment to Capital's success this cycle for anything, much leas vs '25 or '26. The poster wondered what you thought of the commitment. That's all. Thanks for showing us what your knowledge of the landscape is.