Cornell lacrosse 2025

[billhoward]

The Irish explain why:

[KenP]

Any injury updates? Any chance they will be back this season?

[Robb]

Since this was debated by others awhile back, I went on insidelacrosse.com to see how our recruiting is looking.

For 2025's entering class, we are holding our own. Our recruiting is around that of the other Ivies. The ACC is dominating, however, with Duke, UVA, UNC, and Notre Dame way ahead of the Ivies.

For 2026's entering class, which was the point of concern when this topic previously came up, we appear to be sorely lacking. Harvard is doing very well with this class, including two 5* recruits. I know it was mentioned previously that perhaps these rankings will be further updated and that could change things.

I would expect us to be doing better in recruiting given our recent success and all the #1 picks we've had the last few years (Teat, Adler, Kirst). What do you think explains why our recruiting has not caught up to our success? Lack of facilities (indoor practice facility might help)? Or is it as simple as lack of scholarships (despite generous financial aid)?

For the past 10-20 years our on field performance has exceeded our recruiting rankings. Parnell of course famously wasn't even a top 100 recruit his senior year of HS, and only Seibald was truly a "blue chip" recruit on those great teams of his era. But Buczek and Stevens have elevated our on paper recruiting profile, even though many of our recruits only get a bump in ratings well after they have committed to Cornell. Ryan Goldstein, for example, was no stars when he committed, then was bumped to a 3 star, and in his PG year was elevated to a 4 star and ranked 50th overall in his class.

As for the current regulars, most were highly rated in IL's final ratings for their respective classes:

5 stars — Kirst, Long, Staub, Firth, Nikolic (injured of course)
4 stars — Cascadden (was a 5 star but ended up just out of the 5 star group), Goldstein, Dalton, Graham, Waldman, Dooley, Singer, Rayhill, Wallace (as a goalie!), Melkonian, Schwartz, Box, Gilmartin, Kelleher
3 stars — Sheehan, Luzzi
No stars — Bozzi, Knust, Davis

Our backup goalie, sophomore Matt Tully, was a 5 star, and freshman goalie Tim Piacentini (who I believe is injured) was a high 4 star.

While we don't know where the incoming class of 2026 will ultimately fall when the final rankings come out, even if the class turns out to be lower than our recent norm, I would expect it to be an outlier as long as our current coaching staff remains intact — unless the new financial landscape of college sports has a greater impact on lacrosse than seems to be the present case.

Thanks. Very helpful information. FWIW, Kirst and Teat were 5* recruits and Adler was 4*. Similar to hockey, our performance has exceeded our on-paper recruiting. But, similar to hockey, we are in the midst of a long national title drought. So if recruiting can pick up that is one way to finally end the drought. Another way to end the drought is to finally go all the way with our great team this season...!

This year's team has all the elements needed for a championship run—-dynamic attack, excellent midfield (even with 2 key injuries), solid goaltending and an improved defense. A lot needs to go right to make it happen, but we have as good a chance as anyone.

Solid on faceoffs, too, which was not the case for some of our more recent otherwise excellent teams.

[scoop85]

Since this was debated by others awhile back, I went on insidelacrosse.com to see how our recruiting is looking.

For 2025's entering class, we are holding our own. Our recruiting is around that of the other Ivies. The ACC is dominating, however, with Duke, UVA, UNC, and Notre Dame way ahead of the Ivies.

For 2026's entering class, which was the point of concern when this topic previously came up, we appear to be sorely lacking. Harvard is doing very well with this class, including two 5* recruits. I know it was mentioned previously that perhaps these rankings will be further updated and that could change things.

I would expect us to be doing better in recruiting given our recent success and all the #1 picks we've had the last few years (Teat, Adler, Kirst). What do you think explains why our recruiting has not caught up to our success? Lack of facilities (indoor practice facility might help)? Or is it as simple as lack of scholarships (despite generous financial aid)?

For the past 10-20 years our on field performance has exceeded our recruiting rankings. Parnell of course famously wasn't even a top 100 recruit his senior year of HS, and only Seibald was truly a "blue chip" recruit on those great teams of his era. But Buczek and Stevens have elevated our on paper recruiting profile, even though many of our recruits only get a bump in ratings well after they have committed to Cornell. Ryan Goldstein, for example, was no stars when he committed, then was bumped to a 3 star, and in his PG year was elevated to a 4 star and ranked 50th overall in his class.

As for the current regulars, most were highly rated in IL's final ratings for their respective classes:

5 stars — Kirst, Long, Staub, Firth, Nikolic (injured of course)
4 stars — Cascadden (was a 5 star but ended up just out of the 5 star group), Goldstein, Dalton, Graham, Waldman, Dooley, Singer, Rayhill, Wallace (as a goalie!), Melkonian, Schwartz, Box, Gilmartin, Kelleher
3 stars — Sheehan, Luzzi
No stars — Bozzi, Knust, Davis

Our backup goalie, sophomore Matt Tully, was a 5 star, and freshman goalie Tim Piacentini (who I believe is injured) was a high 4 star.

While we don't know where the incoming class of 2026 will ultimately fall when the final rankings come out, even if the class turns out to be lower than our recent norm, I would expect it to be an outlier as long as our current coaching staff remains intact — unless the new financial landscape of college sports has a greater impact on lacrosse than seems to be the present case.

Thanks. Very helpful information. FWIW, Kirst and Teat were 5* recruits and Adler was 4*. Similar to hockey, our performance has exceeded our on-paper recruiting. But, similar to hockey, we are in the midst of a long national title drought. So if recruiting can pick up that is one way to finally end the drought. Another way to end the drought is to finally go all the way with our great team this season...!

This year's team has all the elements needed for a championship run—-dynamic attack, excellent midfield (even with 2 key injuries), solid goaltending and an improved defense. A lot needs to go right to make it happen, but we have as good a chance as anyone.

Solid on faceoffs, too, which was not the case for some of our more recent otherwise excellent teams.

Yes, I meant to include faceoffs, which are a huge factor in our success.

[scoop85]

Any injury updates? Any chance they will be back this season?

The 2 significant injuries are Nikolic and Holmes. Nikolic is out for the season, and while I don't know about Holmes, based on what it looked like when he went down, I suspect he's done too.

[upprdeck]

had 2-3 kids in braces and crutches at the game today.. I would think thats who they were
.

[Iceberg]

We want Yale to win.

First because Yale has had better opponents: their average opponent's record is currently 0.644 vs Albany's 0.508. This goes into the opponents' opponents' contribution to Cornell's RPI.

Second because Yale is currently #16, and we want them to stay in the top 20. Albany is #48 and has no chance as the top 20. The committee uses wins over top 20 as a selection criterion.

Third because (as BearLover said) we are likely to see them again in the ILT, and then their record and opponents' record will count twice as much as Albany's towards Cornell's RPI.

Similarly we want Princeton (#1) to beat Penn (#29).

Dartmouth (#23) vs Brown (#35) is more complicated. If Dartmouth has a shot at top 20 (not sure) then we want them to win, but if not, Brown has a better opponents' record.

Also: Cuse over UNC, Penn State over Rutgers.

https://pro.lacrossereference.com/rpi-d1-men

Syracuse couldn't get the job done but most of the others games have gone out way. Yale behind by one at the half in Albany in what looks to be some downright miserable weather

[CU77]

Yale loses to Albany in OT.

Cornell RPI ends the day at #3.

https://pro.lacrossereference.com/rpi-d1-men

[BearLover]

I'm jealous of everyone in Ithaca who gets to witness history next weekend

[Swampy]

I'm jealous of everyone in Ithaca who gets to witness history next weekend

Me too

[Swampy]

Yale loses to Albany in OT.

Cornell RPI ends the day at #3.

https://pro.lacrossereference.com/rpi-d1-men

RPI likely to drop against Dartmouth and increase during ILT

[Swampy]

Yale loses to Albany in OT.

Cornell RPI ends the day at #3.

https://pro.lacrossereference.com/rpi-d1-men

RPI likely to drop against Dartmouth but increase during ILT.

[CU77]

Darthmouth is 8-4, above average for Cornell's opponents, and opponents' average winning percentage is 50% of RPI. So beating Dartmouth should raise Cornell's RPI.

Of course losing to Dartmouth would be a total disaster that cannot be contemplated ...

[JasonN95]

I'm planning to drive up for the Dartmouth game. There is a "field level" ticket option to sit in bleachers that I don't think was available when I went up for the Denver game. Has anyone done that option before and, if yes, how does the view of the game compare to the crescent?

[billhoward]

Bleachers? West Stands has been down for well over a decade.

The problem is the track around the field that has not be used to competition for decades keeps fans far from the field. Not only are at-Harvard fans close to the action, it appeared one side has been bulldozed to make for a raised viewing platform.