^^^^^^^^^ Very good advice, spot on actually.
Spot on in regard to what? Was not sot on in regard to my kids experience at all. The Club director was involved in helping my kid get noticed and she is on their top team but definitely not considered a top 10 player on the team. A lot more academic money? Couple problems with that . First you will not know what academic money you will qualify for until very late in the process and getting academic money at some of the more competitive schools is in my opinion harder than getting athletic.[/quote]
Did your daughter commit before, or after, the rule change? Would have to be a 2018 (or older) if she did it after the change. 2019s have 3 more weeks before they can start committing again.
The main point is that the rule change shifted a huge amount of power FROM club directors TO college coaches and recruits. I think most people would agree that club directors can still help marginal players over the hump at some schools, especially schools having trouble filling their last spots. Doesn't seem likely to happen often at the better lacrosse schools or the better academic schools. Recruits flood them with interest, and college coaches have plenty of time to see anyone they are actually interested in. No more club directors talking up a 14 or 15 year old girl. The girl's ability will do most of the talking now.
[/quote]
Seems so douchie when you come on this site and act like you have a clue when in reality you are just guessing at how the new recruiting rule will impact these kids. My point was that your " spot on " statement was not for my kid or her friends. Getting athletic money was an easier road than academic for many who went on to great academic schools. There are many who were in the top 5 of their graduating classes wait listed or denied entry from my daughters high school graduating class to many of the schools that her club teammates are attending with decent money. As far as athletic money not being guaranteed , only if they quit.
[/quote]
Actually, I didn't mention athletic vs academic money because I have no disagreement on that point. If you want academic money, focus on very safe schools where your daughter is over-qualified. You shouldn't count on a penny of academic money at any "reach" school where lacrosse is the only reason your daughter can get in.
What I wrote about the power shift is an educated guess, to be sure, but it's supported by logic and reason (unlike your emotional response). If you think what I wrote is wrong, why not say what you think is wrong with it, and explain what you think will happen? I could use a laugh.
[/quote]
Okay I think the club directors will still have a lot of power, was not very long ago that players did not get recruited or commit until their junior year at the earliest. Many seniors at the top schools now did not commit until junior year so it seems logical that things will be similar to that and the club coaches wielded a lot of influence. It seems more about jealousy for you to suggest that the kids who committed early were not chosen because of ability but because a club director "talked them up" but that would not happen 2 years later. If a college coach is too lazy to watch them play in 9th grade but willing to offer them money why would they still not be lazy if the kid is a few years older. The kids that got recruited early did so because they were talented and possibly because their club director got them on the coaches radar , same thing will happen with the new rules. Keep laughing but its obvious your kid missed out on the early recruiting thing and now you need someone to blame, must have been those evil club directors.
