USCL rankings are not to be taken seriously. Sure, the top 25 teams are all pretty good, but whatever team they list as number 1 or 7 or 15 is not in any way indicative of which team would beat the other.
While the local higher-level Baltimore and DC teams that play around the area (HoCO league as an example) are obviously good, there are several teams from LI and upstate NY/Conn that would consistently win against all of them, Crabs included. Beat them all every time? No...but they would win a high percentage of games. Problem is, they don't get to play each other enough.
There seems to be a difference between Balt/DC lacrosse and NY lacrosse.
IMO, the difference between the Baltimore/DC area cubs and the LI/Upstate NY area clubs is the team-hopping that seems to happen more around Baltimore and DC. I don't believe that happens as much up North.
The kids from up North play as if they have been playing together since elementary school, which many of them have. They seems to play more effectively as a team - I see more of them playing for each other and for their team, not to stand out and shine individually. In general, the coaching seems to be superior as well, at least at the youth level. Again, just my observations.
You can coach a lot of things, but familiarity, intuition, and trust only come with time spent playing together. Seems like that doesn't happen in Baltimore/DC to the degree it does up North.
There are many reasons behind the team-hopping in the Baltimore area, the most obvious one being the prevalence of for-profit clubs and the "flavor of the month" approach to filling their rosters. Annual cuts and replacements of boys who are growing and whose bodies are changing (and because of that, may play better or worse season-to-season) mean that rosters are always in flux year-to-year. Kids learn to play "not to fail and get cut" rather than to play for the joy of the game and for their team and buddies. When they hit a growth sport, lose a little speed and/or agility, bam - they are cut.
Another reason is the seemingly annual "yet another club went under or got sold" issues in Baltimore. This past year it was especially bad, with Looney's breaking up, Hardshells being kicked to the curb, Koopers being sold, Kelly Post/True, etc. Lots of kids displaced. New teams and clubs picked up some of these boys, but the teams will be new and the boys unfamiliar with each other on the field. Even the elite teams have shuffled players, dropping some longer-term stalwarts in favor of some of the players from the defunct clubs perceived as a "bigger better deal".
I'm looking at you FCA.
All this club-shuffling is not helpful to these teams, and is especially not helpful to the players. Some will argue that it makes them tougher - that playing for a new coach will help them learn new skills. Maybe. I don't think it helps them to become better players or better teammates.
I believe the bigger issue is the atmosphere it creates. Like a toxic work environment that keeps employees from achieving their best performance (better to just get by than to try new things and risk failure), a toxic club environment (I'm looking at you Team '91) keeps kids from developing confidence, trying new things, and in general holds them back from achieving their potential. Research into resiliency and mental health shows that kids who are supported and valued in a healthy environment are far more resilient than kids who are raised in a hostile environment in which they live in fear of failure.
When former players started using youth lacrosse clubs to make a living instead of teaching the game, things started going downhill. Winning became more important than teaching the game and building players and teams over the long term. Free agency has hit youth sports, and it isn't doing our kids any good.
Just one guy's rant and observations on the state of our game these days.
Haters - fire away!
Hit the wall.
By high school all of this shakes out. The best players are on the field. The kids who are average (which is the VAST MAJORITY) can find themselves caught up in the slurry. The weaker players are cut.
It’s life. It’s the world. That’s how it is.
Parents have weird unreasonable expectations that clubs are to “develop” their average player into a an A conference starter. That and many parents aren’t realistic with how good - or not good - their children are.
Reply
Quote
