BOTC BOTC
The UnD1sputed Showcase (Boys & Girls) in June & the Girls LI Showcase is Open for Registration on CBLaxers.com - Don't Miss Out as 88 Players Only Accepted! | Invest for Growth - ADVERTISE with us!
BOTC GIRLS BOTC BOY BACK OF THE CAGE
BOTC GIRLS BOTC BOY MOST RECENT POSTS
Boys High School Lax
by Anonymous -
Boys High School
by Anonymous -
Girls High School
by Anonymous -
BOTC GIRLS BOTC BOY Forum Statistics
Forums20
Topics3,802
Posts385,564
Members2,606
Most Online62,980
Feb 6th, 2020
BOTC GIRLS BOTC BOY FOLLOW US ON TWITTER
Previous Thread
Next Thread
New Reply
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 1 of 26 1 2 3 25 26
Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 6
lax516 Offline OP
Back of THE CAGE
OP Offline
Back of THE CAGE
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 6
After reading through many of these forums over the years the age and reclassification debate consistently comes to dominate so many of the forums. With so many interested in the topic I think its a good time to debate all aspects including the good, the bad, and the ugly.
For purposes of this discussion let's start by setting the ground rules.
1. A player who complies with the US Lacrosse age requirement of Sept 1, but find themselves in a state that has a dec 1 school cutoff is NOT considered a hold back or reclassified if he is in the lower grade. You must even the playing field and for this argument Sept 1 is the most fair way to start.
2. That being said the current class of 2019 should be sept 1, 2000 or later and be u-13 eligible, and the class of 2017 should be sept 1, 1998 or later and would qualify as U-15.
3. This is not to say private schools don't have different requirement, but this is the fairest way to think of it.

The way many think of this is that the age in the younger divisions U-11 and U-13 are important due to safety. Then as you get into recruiting it then becomes an issue of fairness.

Each year at this time early recruiting class is full of reclassified players and this year is no different. There are boys who have left a public school and repeated 9th grade and other who repeated 8th grade in a private school and returned to public school. There are many ways to get this done and these are just two examples. Most of these players who are turning 16 before and or after the sept 1 us lacrosse guideline, reclassify down a year and repeat the recruiting circuit.
Fair? Not Fair? Short Lived until other boys mature? Exploiting the system. Let's have at it.

Like Reply Quote
BOTC GIRLS BOTC BOY BACK OF THE CAGE SPONSORS

Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by lax516
After reading through many of these forums over the years the age and reclassification debate consistently comes to dominate so many of the forums. With so many interested in the topic I think its a good time to debate all aspects including the good, the bad, and the ugly.
For purposes of this discussion let's start by setting the ground rules.
1. A player who complies with the US Lacrosse age requirement of Sept 1, but find themselves in a state that has a dec 1 school cutoff is NOT considered a hold back or reclassified if he is in the lower grade. You must even the playing field and for this argument Sept 1 is the most fair way to start.
2. That being said the current class of 2019 should be sept 1, 2000 or later and be u-13 eligible, and the class of 2017 should be sept 1, 1998 or later and would qualify as U-15.
3. This is not to say private schools don't have different requirement, but this is the fairest way to think of it.

The way many think of this is that the age in the younger divisions U-11 and U-13 are important due to safety. Then as you get into recruiting it then becomes an issue of fairness.

Each year at this time early recruiting class is full of reclassified players and this year is no different. There are boys who have left a public school and repeated 9th grade and other who repeated 8th grade in a private school and returned to public school. There are many ways to get this done and these are just two examples. Most of these players who are turning 16 before and or after the sept 1 us lacrosse guideline, reclassify down a year and repeat the recruiting circuit.
Fair? Not Fair? Short Lived until other boys mature? Exploiting the system. Let's have at it.


In my mind there are two questions here. First, is it fair/ok that parents reclass? To me it is every parents prerogative to choose to reclass. Whether you decide to reclass is completely up to the parents. For those who choose not to, I don't think they have the right to cry about it. Whether its fair in a grade based youth tourney is a completely separate issue. This is the primary reason USL went to an age based format. If a tournament chooses not to organize their tourney this way then that i there issue.

The second question is whether reclassifying ultimately matters in college play. Since it is a relatively new phenonenom time will tell. It certainly matters in recruiting which is why for now the trend is to reclass.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I just think in my opinion if you go to a birth year system such as youth hockey has used for many years it takes all of the nonsense out it. You have to play with boys and girls your own age. Therefore you can go to any tournament in any state and you are assured of playing teams your own age. Do I think that having your child reclassified to gain an athletic advantage is fair NO but do the rules allow it yes. So I guess we have to live with it for now. In the interest of full disclosure my child has a January birthday. Don't you think it would be a huge advantage reclassifying ?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by lax516
After reading through many of these forums over the years the age and reclassification debate consistently comes to dominate so many of the forums. With so many interested in the topic I think its a good time to debate all aspects including the good, the bad, and the ugly.
For purposes of this discussion let's start by setting the ground rules.
1. A player who complies with the US Lacrosse age requirement of Sept 1, but find themselves in a state that has a dec 1 school cutoff is NOT considered a hold back or reclassified if he is in the lower grade. You must even the playing field and for this argument Sept 1 is the most fair way to start.
2. That being said the current class of 2019 should be sept 1, 2000 or later and be u-13 eligible, and the class of 2017 should be sept 1, 1998 or later and would qualify as U-15.
3. This is not to say private schools don't have different requirement, but this is the fairest way to think of it.

The way many think of this is that the age in the younger divisions U-11 and U-13 are important due to safety. Then as you get into recruiting it then becomes an issue of fairness.

Each year at this time early recruiting class is full of reclassified players and this year is no different. There are boys who have left a public school and repeated 9th grade and other who repeated 8th grade in a private school and returned to public school. There are many ways to get this done and these are just two examples. Most of these players who are turning 16 before and or after the sept 1 us lacrosse guideline, reclassify down a year and repeat the recruiting circuit.
Fair? Not Fair? Short Lived until other boys mature? Exploiting the system. Let's have at it.


In my mind there are two questions here. First, is it fair/ok that parents reclass? To me it is every parents prerogative to choose to reclass. Whether you decide to reclass is completely up to the parents. For those who choose not to, I don't think they have the right to cry about it. Whether its fair in a grade based youth tourney is a completely separate issue. This is the primary reason USL went to an age based format. If a tournament chooses not to organize their tourney this way then that i there issue.

The second question is whether reclassifying ultimately matters in college play. Since it is a relatively new phenonenom time will tell. It certainly matters in recruiting which is why for now the trend is to reclass.


!. No it is not fair, because everyone can't afford to do it. This perpetuates Lacrosse as a "rich mans sport" It creates an dichotomy between the "haves" and the "have nots". Yes some are good enough to still make it , but it put other excellent prospects at a disadvantage.

2. I believe that re-classed recruits will pan out to be mostly average college players. This is because the best athletes in the grade who are age true and make it through the recruiting process, will ultimately surpass the hold backs, on average. If you hold your kid back for athletic reasons, it means you don't believe in the abilities of your child. Just like you cheat on your taxes, you are cheating with the lives of other people who are doing things the right way. You are a disgrace to the sport and insulting you own child's abilities.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I agree it is every parents prerogative to hold a child back but I do not agree it is right. and I am sorry, I do not agree with your ground rules.

To me a Sept 1 to Nov 30 birthdate is a hold back. Why because that is what my state (NY) says it to be. Also if I started at one grade lets say 2019 and realized I can get held back after I started school because my birthdate was Sept/Oct 2001. That is a clear hold back (reclassify) and shoots your Sept theory in my opinion! Some kids did this as early as 3rd grade not 8th/9th.

Now if your son/daughter was born in Sept-Nov 2001 and did not start as a 2019 child (started K in 2006) you are far less creepy but you are a hold back and are still gaming the system. Especially if you are in a state which states Birth month Sept -Nov should start on time.






Originally Posted by lax516
After reading through many of these forums over the years the age and reclassification debate consistently comes to dominate so many of the forums. With so many interested in the topic I think its a good time to debate all aspects including the good, the bad, and the ugly.
For purposes of this discussion let's start by setting the ground rules.
1. A player who complies with the US Lacrosse age requirement of Sept 1, but find themselves in a state that has a dec 1 school cutoff is NOT considered a hold back or reclassified if he is in the lower grade. You must even the playing field and for this argument Sept 1 is the most fair way to start.
2. That being said the current class of 2019 should be sept 1, 2000 or later and be u-13 eligible, and the class of 2017 should be sept 1, 1998 or later and would qualify as U-15.
3. This is not to say private schools don't have different requirement, but this is the fairest way to think of it.

The way many think of this is that the age in the younger divisions U-11 and U-13 are important due to safety. Then as you get into recruiting it then becomes an issue of fairness.

Each year at this time early recruiting class is full of reclassified players and this year is no different. There are boys who have left a public school and repeated 9th grade and other who repeated 8th grade in a private school and returned to public school. There are many ways to get this done and these are just two examples. Most of these players who are turning 16 before and or after the sept 1 us lacrosse guideline, reclassify down a year and repeat the recruiting circuit.
Fair? Not Fair? Short Lived until other boys mature? Exploiting the system. Let's have at it.

Like Reply Quote
BOTC GIRLS BOTC BOY Sponsored Links
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
There is no question that holding back, grade repeating, and reclassifying are all done for one reason. It is to gain a competitive, unfair advantage over your competition. This is an indisputable fact. It is also the definition of "cheating" as defined by google, should you decide to search the meaning of the word.
Again, the benefits of taking an athlete and dropping him into a group of kids 1 to 2 years younger and having him compete are very clear.
You need not go any further than the BCS National Championship game last night to see the potential benefits of holding back your kid. The Hiesman winning, Championship winning "FRESHMAN" quarterback was 20 years old! That's right, a 20 year old freshman. Not 17 or 18. Many, many kids are 20 in the beginning of their SENIOR year of college. The afore mentioned QB could play in college till 24 or 25. Surely, he'll be in the NFL before that.
Whether you agree with reclassification or not you cannot dispute the potential benefits. Of course, those benefits come at the expense of others. Hence, the concept of "cheating". Obviously, with Lacrosse there is no NFL, so the big benefit is the prized colleges.
Moving forward, all tournaments, camps, showcases and recruiting events need to be age based with proof of age. Its the only way to take the benefit out of doing this. Clearly, there is nothing you can do about the HS piece. However, by adopting age based, enforced events outside of HS, coaches will be able to determine how good these hold backs really are. Surely, when playing in the HS environment they will excel, when forced to play on age, they may not be so stand out. Better for the colleges and better for the kids.
For those parents that have already done this, no this not whining. It is a clear presentation of the facts and the truth, something you folks don't do well with.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
2017s regardless of age should play on HS teams and not youth U-15 teams. The reason US Lacrosse uses U-15 instead of U-14 is to allow reclassified 8th graders to play the year before they begin high school.

U-15 is intended for 8th graders only (it is a 2018 bracket this year).

Originally Posted by lax516
After reading through many of these forums over the years the age and reclassification debate consistently comes to dominate so many of the forums. With so many interested in the topic I think its a good time to debate all aspects including the good, the bad, and the ugly.
For purposes of this discussion let's start by setting the ground rules.
1. A player who complies with the US Lacrosse age requirement of Sept 1, but find themselves in a state that has a dec 1 school cutoff is NOT considered a hold back or reclassified if he is in the lower grade. You must even the playing field and for this argument Sept 1 is the most fair way to start.
2. That being said the current class of 2019 should be sept 1, 2000 or later and be u-13 eligible, and the class of 2017 should be sept 1, 1998 or later and would qualify as U-15.
3. This is not to say private schools don't have different requirement, but this is the fairest way to think of it.

The way many think of this is that the age in the younger divisions U-11 and U-13 are important due to safety. Then as you get into recruiting it then becomes an issue of fairness.

Each year at this time early recruiting class is full of reclassified players and this year is no different. There are boys who have left a public school and repeated 9th grade and other who repeated 8th grade in a private school and returned to public school. There are many ways to get this done and these are just two examples. Most of these players who are turning 16 before and or after the sept 1 us lacrosse guideline, reclassify down a year and repeat the recruiting circuit.
Fair? Not Fair? Short Lived until other boys mature? Exploiting the system. Let's have at it.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
So says the parent of a re-classified/ holdback child. U-15 eligibility is determined by age, not grade level.
Originally Posted by Anonymous
2017s regardless of age should play on HS teams and not youth U-15 teams. The reason US Lacrosse uses U-15 instead of U-14 is to allow reclassified 8th graders to play the year before they begin high school.

U-15 is intended for 8th graders only (it is a 2018 bracket this year).

Originally Posted by lax516
After reading through many of these forums over the years the age and reclassification debate consistently comes to dominate so many of the forums. With so many interested in the topic I think its a good time to debate all aspects including the good, the bad, and the ugly.
For purposes of this discussion let's start by setting the ground rules.
1. A player who complies with the US Lacrosse age requirement of Sept 1, but find themselves in a state that has a dec 1 school cutoff is NOT considered a hold back or reclassified if he is in the lower grade. You must even the playing field and for this argument Sept 1 is the most fair way to start.
2. That being said the current class of 2019 should be sept 1, 2000 or later and be u-13 eligible, and the class of 2017 should be sept 1, 1998 or later and would qualify as U-15.
3. This is not to say private schools don't have different requirement, but this is the fairest way to think of it.

The way many think of this is that the age in the younger divisions U-11 and U-13 are important due to safety. Then as you get into recruiting it then becomes an issue of fairness.

Each year at this time early recruiting class is full of reclassified players and this year is no different. There are boys who have left a public school and repeated 9th grade and other who repeated 8th grade in a private school and returned to public school. There are many ways to get this done and these are just two examples. Most of these players who are turning 16 before and or after the sept 1 us lacrosse guideline, reclassify down a year and repeat the recruiting circuit.
Fair? Not Fair? Short Lived until other boys mature? Exploiting the system. Let's have at it.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Most rising sophomores on LI are U-15... Hello. Of course in Md and Pa they are 8th graders. Amazing, age based for everything, this has really got to stop. That's why Pa and Md teams can't compete at the U-15 Championship. They can't play down, they have to play on age.

Originally Posted by Anonymous
So says the parent of a re-classified/ holdback child. U-15 eligibility is determined by age, not grade level.
Originally Posted by Anonymous
2017s regardless of age should play on HS teams and not youth U-15 teams. The reason US Lacrosse uses U-15 instead of U-14 is to allow reclassified 8th graders to play the year before they begin high school.

U-15 is intended for 8th graders only (it is a 2018 bracket this year).

Originally Posted by lax516
After reading through many of these forums over the years the age and reclassification debate consistently comes to dominate so many of the forums. With so many interested in the topic I think its a good time to debate all aspects including the good, the bad, and the ugly.
For purposes of this discussion let's start by setting the ground rules.
1. A player who complies with the US Lacrosse age requirement of Sept 1, but find themselves in a state that has a dec 1 school cutoff is NOT considered a hold back or reclassified if he is in the lower grade. You must even the playing field and for this argument Sept 1 is the most fair way to start.
2. That being said the current class of 2019 should be sept 1, 2000 or later and be u-13 eligible, and the class of 2017 should be sept 1, 1998 or later and would qualify as U-15.
3. This is not to say private schools don't have different requirement, but this is the fairest way to think of it.

The way many think of this is that the age in the younger divisions U-11 and U-13 are important due to safety. Then as you get into recruiting it then becomes an issue of fairness.

Each year at this time early recruiting class is full of reclassified players and this year is no different. There are boys who have left a public school and repeated 9th grade and other who repeated 8th grade in a private school and returned to public school. There are many ways to get this done and these are just two examples. Most of these players who are turning 16 before and or after the sept 1 us lacrosse guideline, reclassify down a year and repeat the recruiting circuit.
Fair? Not Fair? Short Lived until other boys mature? Exploiting the system. Let's have at it.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
There is no question that holding back, grade repeating, and reclassifying are all done for one reason. It is to gain a competitive, unfair advantage over your competition. This is an indisputable fact. It is also the definition of "cheating" as defined by google, should you decide to search the meaning of the word.
Again, the benefits of taking an athlete and dropping him into a group of kids 1 to 2 years younger and having him compete are very clear.
You need not go any further than the BCS National Championship game last night to see the potential benefits of holding back your kid. The Hiesman winning, Championship winning "FRESHMAN" quarterback was 20 years old! That's right, a 20 year old freshman. Not 17 or 18. Many, many kids are 20 in the beginning of their SENIOR year of college. The afore mentioned QB could play in college till 24 or 25. Surely, he'll be in the NFL before that.
Whether you agree with reclassification or not you cannot dispute the potential benefits. Of course, those benefits come at the expense of others. Hence, the concept of "cheating". Obviously, with Lacrosse there is no NFL, so the big benefit is the prized colleges.
Moving forward, all tournaments, camps, showcases and recruiting events need to be age based with proof of age. Its the only way to take the benefit out of doing this. Clearly, there is nothing you can do about the HS piece. However, by adopting age based, enforced events outside of HS, coaches will be able to determine how good these hold backs really are. Surely, when playing in the HS environment they will excel, when forced to play on age, they may not be so stand out. Better for the colleges and better for the kids.
For those parents that have already done this, no this not whining. It is a clear presentation of the facts and the truth, something you folks don't do well with.


Good post

Like Reply Quote
BOTC GIRLS BOTC BOY Sponsored Links
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Let's face the facts, the only reason that reclassification is such a controversial topic is because of the recent insanity of freshman committing. Years ago, no one ever mentioned or cared if a player being recruited as a junior was 17yr old or 18yrs old. The lacrosse world has changed and now everyone feels the need to gain an edge. In the end, it really doesn't matter. The 'known' kids on the Island are committed, quietly committing, or are in advanced talks and visits. Don't sweat it, talent will always be noticed and most coaches can see the player's skill set regardless of his/her 'premature' size.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Unfortunately, we/you can complain all you want - without a strong national governing body, i.e. US Lacrosse... mandating correct age classifications, AND enforcing them this is all moot. There are two very simple models to follow, US Soccer or US Hockey. Yes, initial costs will be significant to implement. But in the long run, is not the growth of the sport and the safety of the players the ultimate goal of US Lacrosse? In membership alone, and this is low end... 410,000 members X $25 per year = $10,250,000 per year for US Lacrosse. Individual Player Cards, Birth Certficates, Age Classifications from U7-U15, (not U11, U13, U15...should be U7,U8,U9, etc) older than that you can call HS-A for Varsity, HS-B for JV

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
The sad thing is that it might take a catastrophic injury to a player that is a year and a half younger and 50 pounds lighter for US Lacrosse to rethink to whole process. Isn't that why [lacrosse] football in most states have weight limits for players ? Yes I know that every once in a while there is the young man who's Dad played in the NFL and who's Mom played in the WNBA who is just going to be big for his age. Thats just lucky genetics not working/cheating the system. Seems like the MD. parents are pretty quiet on this topic. Come up north this summer and bring your birth certificates or better yet have US Lacrosse start issuing player I.D. when memberships are payed. Lets just even the playing field. Don't you want to win fair and square ? I would.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Let's face the facts, the only reason that reclassification is such a controversial topic is because of the recent insanity of freshman committing. Years ago, no one ever mentioned or cared if a player being recruited as a junior was 17yr old or 18yrs old. The lacrosse world has changed and now everyone feels the need to gain an edge. In the end, it really doesn't matter. The 'known' kids on the Island are committed, quietly committing, or are in advanced talks and visits. Don't sweat it, talent will always be noticed and most coaches can see the player's skill set regardless of his/her 'premature' size.



I could not agree with you more. I am a parent of a early January 2017 9th grader in NY who is has always been bigger stronger and faster than most other kids his grade (currently over 6' and about 160lbs.). I think at the younger grades, lets say 8th and under it should be strict age based as I would be upset if my child had to opppose a player the size of my son who had reclassified down to 8th grade. I think it is purely a safety issue at that level. Once they hit HS I think it should be all bets are off. Everything will even out once they hit the playing field as my son played against senior and juniors. all during fall ball. As far as recruiting goes if your son can play he will eventuall y get seen and he will end going somewhere. I think a lot of the issues we see on this board are from insecure parents wh o need to have a son or daughter be " commited" by the time they finish 10th grade. Remember everyone, playing lax at a top tier D1 school is work, about 30+ hours a week on top of classes with no NBA or NFL pot of gold at graduation. Not sure if a 15 or 16 year old understands that yet. Be careful what yo u wish for

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I have an idea - why don't we all rally to remove any kid that's better than ours because of cheating!!! Yeah, like those kids bigger and stronger and faster than ours because they had good training and that's not fair. Hey, while we're at it lets get rid of the two handed players because they are ambidextrious and THAT'S not fair. And finally, get rid of all the brainiacs because they all have the best tutors and isn't that cheating, too!

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
There is no question that holding back, grade repeating, and reclassifying are all done for one reason. It is to gain a competitive, unfair advantage over your competition. This is an indisputable fact. It is also the definition of "cheating" as defined by google, should you decide to search the meaning of the word.
Again, the benefits of taking an athlete and dropping him into a group of kids 1 to 2 years younger and having him compete are very clear.
You need not go any further than the BCS National Championship game last night to see the potential benefits of holding back your kid. The Hiesman winning, Championship winning "FRESHMAN" quarterback was 20 years old! That's right, a 20 year old freshman. Not 17 or 18. Many, many kids are 20 in the beginning of their SENIOR year of college. The afore mentioned QB could play in college till 24 or 25. Surely, he'll be in the NFL before that.
Whether you agree with reclassification or not you cannot dispute the potential benefits. Of course, those benefits come at the expense of others. Hence, the concept of "cheating". Obviously, with Lacrosse there is no NFL, so the big benefit is the prized colleges.
Moving forward, all tournaments, camps, showcases and recruiting events need to be age based with proof of age. Its the only way to take the benefit out of doing this. Clearly, there is nothing you can do about the HS piece. However, by adopting age based, enforced events outside of HS, coaches will be able to determine how good these hold backs really are. Surely, when playing in the HS environment they will excel, when forced to play on age, they may not be so stand out. Better for the colleges and better for the kids.
For those parents that have already done this, no this not whining. It is a clear presentation of the facts and the truth, something you folks don't do well with.


Winston was 18 when he entered Florida State; his birthday is in January and he red-shirted.

Maturity and academic development are both legitimate reasons for parents to hold back their child; it's not all about gaining an athletic advantage.

Reclassifying may affect some "normal" aged children in their ability to be recruited, but it does not affect so many that you think. Where reclassifying really affects other children is at the younger ages where size disparity can lead to injuries.

Reclassification is a reality that parents and children will need to deal with and accept because there is nothing that can prevent it.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 51
Back of THE CAGE
Offline
Back of THE CAGE
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 51
Good post. I agree with premise that it will ultimately come out in the wash. However, I also think the recruiting of 14-15 yo kids is the main driver of reclassing.

A few points on the age issue:
- USLacrosse claims to be "working on" an age verification system to include birth certificate submission;
- USLacrosse can enforce rules by refusing to provide supplemental insurance for the events that don't comply with its age restrictions;
- States have a variety of cut offs for school age. VA is 9/30, NY is 12/31. Current date of September 1 makes us older in VA, but 3 months seems trivial;
- Lax may not have the numbers in non-hotbeds to do individual years (U7, U8, U9 etc);
- Under current guidelines, U15 isn't just 8th grade, it includes 9th grade too (provided kid doesn't play JV).

Assuming USLacrosse gets it together and implements a reasonable system, it seems pretty easy to fix youth lacrosse age issues. In addition, limiting kids to 4 years of HS/JV play will eliminate most of the transfer/repeat/reclass issues during HS years.

Biggest problems are in the U15 year, which is when kids are hitting puberty, are about to start being recruited, and an extra year is very meaningful. Not surprisingly, this is when majority of reclassings occur.

Absent a NCAA recruiting fix, or Gentlemens' agreement among coaches to delay recruiting, I don't think there a perfect solution. Many of the reclassed kids play HS ball anyway, and enjoy best of both worlds. 4 yr HS rule would help.

Bottom line, this is on USLacrosse to fix.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Wow that was a great post. Did you put a lot of thought into it. I bet you are one of those parents who reclassified your child. Do you pound your chest and feel proud that your child , who is a year older or more is a star on their team ? This thread must have hit a real nerve with you Dad. Try and add something constructive next time.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Well said VA Lax dad. I have read all of your post. We are on the same page with all of this nonsense . I just wish US Lacrosse would do something about it. Thanks Again. Long Island Lax Dad

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
Back of THE CAGE
*
Offline
Back of THE CAGE
*
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Well said VA Lax dad. I have read all of your post. We are on the same page with all of this nonsense . I just wish US Lacrosse would do something about it. Thanks Again. Long Island Lax Dad
BOTC has actually e-mailed our contacts here on Long Island and we have asked that this thread be passed along to our US Lacrosse peers as a lesson in what is really happening on the ground. Would it surprise you to hear that the Long Island organization responded within five minutes ... and the US Lacrosse organization ... well, let's just say we hope that they opened the e-mail.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
There is no question that holding back, grade repeating, and reclassifying are all done for one reason. It is to gain a competitive, unfair advantage over your competition. This is an indisputable fact. It is also the definition of "cheating" as defined by google, should you decide to search the meaning of the word.
Again, the benefits of taking an athlete and dropping him into a group of kids 1 to 2 years younger and having him compete are very clear.
You need not go any further than the BCS National Championship game last night to see the potential benefits of holding back your kid. The Hiesman winning, Championship winning "FRESHMAN" quarterback was 20 years old! That's right, a 20 year old freshman. Not 17 or 18. Many, many kids are 20 in the beginning of their SENIOR year of college. The afore mentioned QB could play in college till 24 or 25. Surely, he'll be in the NFL before that.
Whether you agree with reclassification or not you cannot dispute the potential benefits. Of course, those benefits come at the expense of others. Hence, the concept of "cheating". Obviously, with Lacrosse there is no NFL, so the big benefit is the prized colleges.
Moving forward, all tournaments, camps, showcases and recruiting events need to be age based with proof of age. Its the only way to take the benefit out of doing this. Clearly, there is nothing you can do about the HS piece. However, by adopting age based, enforced events outside of HS, coaches will be able to determine how good these hold backs really are. Surely, when playing in the HS environment they will excel, when forced to play on age, they may not be so stand out. Better for the colleges and better for the kids.
For those parents that have already done this, no this not whining. It is a clear presentation of the facts and the truth, something you folks don't do well with.


Winston was 18 when he entered Florida State; his birthday is in January and he red-shirted.

Maturity and academic development are both legitimate reasons for parents to hold back their child; it's not all about gaining an athletic advantage.

Reclassifying may affect some "normal" aged children in their ability to be recruited, but it does not affect so many that you think. Where reclassifying really affects other children is at the younger ages where size disparity can lead to injuries.

Reclassification is a reality that parents and children will need to deal with and accept because there is nothing that can prevent it.


Winston IS a 20 yo freshman, red shirt or not. As reported by ESPN last night.
Correction: We may have to deal with cheating I mean "reclassification", but we definitely don't have to accept it.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
This is college sports. This is life. It sucks, but it's the way it is. And we all make choices that build our personal character.

Yes, I agree US Lacrosse should do something about it. I agree colleges should do something about it. I agree parents shouldn't make initial contact so early...and yes, I agree those trying to gain unfair advantage with age and physical maturity should wear a big red 'L' on their chest.

Know what's interesting though? I just did a 15 minute search on wikipedia for the top ten lax players that came to my mind...starting at a time of a famous goalie to a recent Tewaaraton winner. Would you believe they all started college at 20 years old? Try it for yourself. I was shocked and saddened. Birth year/first year of college.

I chose not to list them out of respect, although much of that respect is now lost... (I can see them all now, frantically removing their birth dates!)...and ironically(?), they are all the main ambassadors of the sport we love. So we consumers are at fault too, giving them the support.

I instantly realized this issue has been going on for a very long time, my friends. And for a brief moment, I was jealous I didn't take an extra two years of development to dominate even more, and become part of the money making machine.

This is not a recent phenomenon.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
This is college sports. This is life. It sucks, but it's the way it is. And we all make choices that build our personal character.

Yes, I agree US Lacrosse should do something about it. I agree colleges should do something about it. I agree parents shouldn't make initial contact so early...and yes, I agree those trying to gain unfair advantage with age and physical maturity should wear a big red 'L' on their chest.

Know what's interesting though? I just did a 15 minute search on wikipedia for the top ten lax players that came to my mind...starting at a time of a famous goalie to a recent Tewaaraton winner. Would you believe they all started college at 20 years old? Try it for yourself. I was shocked and saddened. Birth year/first year of college.

I chose not to list them out of respect, although much of that respect is now lost... (I can see them all now, frantically removing their birth dates!)...and ironically(?), they are all the main ambassadors of the sport we love. So we consumers are at fault too, giving them the support.

I instantly realized this issue has been going on for a very long time, my friends. And for a brief moment, I was jealous I didn't take an extra two years of development to dominate even more, and become part of the money making machine.

This is not a recent phenomenon.


I am a huge proponent of enforced age based rules and despise those that game the system. That being said, there is a tremendous difference between gaming the system at 16 and playing with 14 years olds to increase your standing at a freshman recruiting event and taking a PG year after you earned your way fair and square. Many times that PG year is truly academic based. Even if it is athletic based, those that chose to do it are not doing it at another's expense. Big difference between the two situations. I'm sure the majority of the guys you're talking about are PG type guys... Let's hope.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A

Correct this is a sport where they have been playing down for as long as I can remember. I remember going into homeroom on the first day of school (a long time ago) and seeing new faces... Not to the school but to the grade. And it was for Lax. Going age based takes care of this on the youth level (which I wish US lacrosse would enact ASAP) however, it will still be done on the school level. It doesn't bother me on the school level - but on the youth level it is gaining an unfair advantage because of the disparity of how kids mature. But it makes no sense to spread the age groups in two year intervals. Just go U9, U10, U11, U12 etc. to U15 - put a corresponding birth day rage with each age (Sept 1st - Aug 31st) and then go grade in two year intervals on the JV & Varsity level. Really, why is so hard. This would end the debate and if parents choose to hold back their child (which I don't begrudge) the child plays with the right age group up to HS.

I may be over simplifying a very hot topic, but what am I missing.


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I do believe that taking a PG year to mature academically and ready yourself for a school is very different from reclassifying in 8th grade or red-shirting in Kindergarten.

Many of the older players who took Post Grad years did so because they needed to as a contingency for acceptence to Lax U which would not of admitted them without lacrosse and without the PG.

I think this is a reasonable decision for an adult (18 yr old) to make and therefore very different from reclassifying and/or red-shirting in kindergarten.

In the post grad case there is no age based physical advantage gained during the recruiting period (no lacrosse cheating).

I am strongly opposed to reclassifying 13 year olds and red-shirting 5 yr olds, but if my son has an opportunity to attend a top school available only with a willingness to PG then I will support.

For your old school lax heroes you should check date of birth vs. HS graduation date. If you agree with me, perhaps you will start respecting some of them again

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
To me the schools take a big risk by committing earlier. What if the kid gets hurt or otherwise cannot play? If you get him as a junior then you have one more year of lacrosse (and other sports) to survive. But for every year earlier that you take a kid the university is at greater risk that he won't be able to play or be the player they hoped by the time he arrives on their campus. Of course he could work hard, get stronger, etc. and be more of a beast on arrival......but it just seems so early.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
A parent of a true 2017 14 yr old here who stands 5'11" about 177 lbs. middle of '99 birth date.

It has been my observation that while there are numerous reclassifieds out there; the lax abilities of those kids who are true 2017's are not overwhelmed by the age differential. Both large and smaller 2017's who are in the puberty stage appear to be able to hold their own quite proficiently.

However; the size discrepancy does present a challenge for those who have yet to reach the puberty stride and thus they are at a disadvantage in that respect, but I've seen some amazing "little" kids outshine these reclassifieds on so many occasions that it doesn't seem to matter after a while. Thankfully, there aren't that many injuries sustained as a result of these differentials in age and size. Sure some larger and older specimens need to rely on aggression to compete but that won't change significantly in their lax careers.

"Stealing" potential recruitment spots is probably less significant than assumed by most.
Clearly, those kids with talent will be noticed by recruiters eventually. Be it in the age appropriate class or a year later. The players who are destined to play in D1-3 programs will hopefully most likely get a chance to do so.

I would argue that most of the objections to all of this are generated by the families of players who are are on that proverbial cusp of being "elite" and who might likely be over shadowed by a reclassified player. I contend that given time, they will mature into the great players they want to be and land with a good program.

It's the early recruiting frenzy that has lit many fires of insecurity. I am not opposed to the early commitment process. It will eventually reveal itself to be just another wrinkle in the recruiting process that will be contended with and ultimately not be as large a factor as the hype is purporting it to be.

As long as the player(s) in question are mature enough, be they reclassifieds or not, and can be safely guided through this gauntlet by their parents and coaches, there should be little impact that will place them under undo stresses.

For these early commitment players, academic indices will be met or not. Abilities will prove to be sufficient or not. There will be "pressures" on committed players and non-committed players alike to continue to strive and achieve as they are wont to do.

This is not a new concept to these upper level players and they and their parents will choose that which is appropriate for them. They are all clearly high achievers with respect to lax.

It will remain to be revealed whether or not they can continue to develop both academically and athletically, as it will be for any player with hopes of playing at the next level.

Let them play. The chips will fall where they are supposed to.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Seventh grader Oliver Wahlstrom has committed to play college hockey for Red Gendron at the University of Maine. Just weeks after Springfield Cathedral goaltender Keith Petruzzelli became the first '99 in the country to commit, Wahlstrom one-upped him. Wahlstrom was born June 13, 2000, meaning he won't turn 14 for another six months, which makes him the youngest player to ever commit to an NCAA college hockey program.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
Back of THE CAGE
*
Offline
Back of THE CAGE
*
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Seventh grader Oliver Wahlstrom has committed to play college hockey for Red Gendron at the University of Maine. Just weeks after Springfield Cathedral goaltender Keith Petruzzelli became the first '99 in the country to commit, Wahlstrom one-upped him. Wahlstrom was born June 13, 2000, meaning he won't turn 14 for another six months, which makes him the youngest player to ever commit to an NCAA college hockey program.
Although off-topic to lacrosse, here are two videos of this junior league player at nine and ten years of age. He will be eligible to participate at the University of Maine in the Fall 2019 semester.

This child has incredible stickwork and skating skill as you can see. Being from Yarmouth, Maine, this is his home town college and the family might well be season ticket holders for Maine. (For those not familiar with NCAA Division I's Hockey East Conference, the level of competition is the very best in the country and the college varsity teams play a tremendous brand of hockey.)




Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
By his birthdate he should be in 8th grade. Probably doesn't matter, I bet he plays for H.S. team already. You would think a kid with his skills would be playing Juniors in Canada and try to be drafted at 17-18.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
That may be true that he should be in 8th grade but unlike lacrosse when it comes to tournament play he has to play with kids that were born his same year. Wish US Lacrosse would adopt the same system. I believe that a large percentage of the NHL have birthdays in the first three months of their birth year.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
That may be true that he should be in 8th grade but unlike lacrosse when it comes to tournament play he has to play with kids that were born his same year. Wish US Lacrosse would adopt the same system. I believe that a large percentage of the NHL have birthdays in the first three months of their birth year.


That's because age matters... It's all about physical maturity and development. Why else would all these sleaze bag parents do this? For academics? No, to gain an unfair advantage, period!

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Let's everyone agree, those that reclass their kids in 8th and 9th grade are gaming the system for an athlitic advantage...unlike that parent who holds back his late developing child in kindergarden.

Reclass=cheating
hold back for maturity reasons=smart parenting

If you are a parent that reclassed your kid, you are the cheater, there is simply no way around it. If you were being fair, you would just send your kid to a pg year, but you dont, you do it when the size difference makes your kid a standout.

check out the 2018 forum, dukes bringing kids that are now 2 years older...sad silly people...

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Let's everyone agree, those that reclass their kids in 8th and 9th grade are gaming the system for an athlitic advantage...unlike that parent who holds back his late developing child in kindergarden.

Reclass=cheating
hold back for maturity reasons=smart parenting

If you are a parent that reclassed your kid, you are the cheater, there is simply no way around it. If you were being fair, you would just send your kid to a pg year, but you dont, you do it when the size difference makes your kid a standout.

check out the 2018 forum, dukes bringing kids that are now 2 years older...sad silly people...


I think it is all the same, kindergarden holdback, 9th grade reclass, PG year at prep and non medical redshirt in college.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Let's everyone agree, those that reclass their kids in 8th and 9th grade are gaming the system for an athlitic advantage...unlike that parent who holds back his late developing child in kindergarden.

Reclass=cheating
hold back for maturity reasons=smart parenting

If you are a parent that reclassed your kid, you are the cheater, there is simply no way around it. If you were being fair, you would just send your kid to a pg year, but you dont, you do it when the size difference makes your kid a standout.

check out the 2018 forum, dukes bringing kids that are now 2 years older...sad silly people...


I think it is all the same, kindergarden holdback, 9th grade reclass, PG year at prep and non medical redshirt in college.


And that is the problem... It is not all the same! How manty times does it have to be spelt out. They are all cheating but not all the same severity.
Least PG earned the spot and needs to get grades up.
Middle kinder holdbacks do it because the child isn't ready at 5yo (gaming the system to put your child in a better life situations.
Worst any hold back after 2nd grade for sports reasons. Because if the kid was held back for grades do you think they should be so committed to a sport and not the books.


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
LOL. Nobody cares about this except some random dads in Long Island.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
That may be true that he should be in 8th grade but unlike lacrosse when it comes to tournament play he has to play with kids that were born his same year. Wish US Lacrosse would adopt the same system. I believe that a large percentage of the NHL have birthdays in the first three months of their birth year.


That's because age matters... It's all about physical maturity and development. Why else would all these sleaze bag parents do this? For academics? No, to gain an unfair advantage, period!


That is ridiculous. The number of kids that do not start kindergarten or repeat kindergarten are doing so because they are not ready emotionally, academically, physically or socially. The percentage of parents that are thinking about their kid being a D1 player some day are very small. Most parents spend many nights worrying about their kid not being on par with their peers, and you are going to say they are cheaters? The few that do think that holding their kid back at kindergarten for athletics will have other issues down the road, but like others have said- most sports require player passes with birth dates- so if they want to play hockey or baseball or another sport- they will play with their correct age. It would be smart for US Lacrosse to follow in their lead, but clearly there is a huge difference in someone repeating kindergarten or starting a year late, as opposed to parents holding their kid back in 8th or 9th grade.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
My kid is in 2nd grade but birthday is May. I want to hold him back. He has great stick skills so when held back he will be even more dominate.

Can someone give me advice on the best way to hold him back? What grade?do I have to send him to pvt school? Thanks for the help!


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
EXCELLENT

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
Back of THE CAGE
*
Offline
Back of THE CAGE
*
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by Anonymous
My kid is in 2nd grade but birthday is May. I want to hold him back. He has great stick skills so when held back he will be even more dominate.

Can someone give me advice on the best way to hold him back? What grade?do I have to send him to pvt school? Thanks for the help!
Our advice would be to seriously review the criteria you are using to decide your child's future.

If that doesn't convince you holding back a second grader is wrong, why not put it all on your son? Encourage him to cut class, fail exams, become socially inept, and perhaps even have some behavioral issues with the teacher - and principal. That should do the trick.

Second, please learn the difference between dominate (a verb) and dominant (an adjective)? If you want to be snarky in a post, you have to at least make the effort to use the language properly.

Sometimes, I really wonder whether folks are visiting Colorado and then coming back on an overnight flight with some of these posts.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by CageSage
Originally Posted by Anonymous
My kid is in 2nd grade but birthday is May. I want to hold him back. He has great stick skills so when held back he will be even more dominate.

Can someone give me advice on the best way to hold him back? What grade?do I have to send him to pvt school? Thanks for the help!
Our advice would be to seriously review the criteria you are using to decide your child's future.

If that doesn't convince you holding back a second grader is wrong, why not put it all on your son? Encourage him to cut class, fail exams, become socially inept, and perhaps even have some behavioral issues with the teacher - and principal. That should do the trick.

Second, please learn the difference between dominate (a verb) and dominant (an adjective)? If you want to be snarky in a post, you have to at least make the effort to use the language properly.

Sometimes, I really wonder whether folks are visiting Colorado and then coming back on an overnight flight with some of these posts.


Sage strikes early!
at least he could try and bring some back from Colorado and let his kid take it to school...that ought to do the trick...a year in Juvie is kinda like a PG but early, no?
:-)

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Justify all you want. However you justify it, it all comes down to the same thing. People are trying to help their children. They want to give their child an advantage that will help them in some way.

it is all the same, kindergarden holdback, 9th grade reclass, PG year at prep and non medical redshirt in college.

It is all done to help the kid gain an advantage.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
That may be true that he should be in 8th grade but unlike lacrosse when it comes to tournament play he has to play with kids that were born his same year. Wish US Lacrosse would adopt the same system. I believe that a large percentage of the NHL have birthdays in the first three months of their birth year.


That's because age matters... It's all about physical maturity and development. Why else would all these sleaze bag parents do this? For academics? No, to gain an unfair advantage, period!



That is ridiculous. The number of kids that do not start kindergarten or repeat kindergarten are doing so because they are not ready emotionally, academically, physically or socially. The percentage of parents that are thinking about their kid being a D1 player some day are very small. Most parents spend many nights worrying about their kid not being on par with their peers, and you are going to say they are cheaters? The few that do think that holding their kid back at kindergarten for athletics will have other issues down the road, but like others have said- most sports require player passes with birth dates- so if they want to play hockey or baseball or another sport- they will play with their correct age. It would be smart for US Lacrosse to follow in their lead, but clearly there is a huge difference in someone repeating kindergarten or starting a year late, as opposed to parents holding their kid back in 8th or 9th grade.


Don't be so surprised how big the number of kinder holdbacks is for more than emotional, academic or physical reasons. They know what they are doing. Academically, If you are lucky enough to be in a town with an accelerated program how many of them are the kinder hold backs. An overwhelming majority. Why?because their parents held hem back not for sport but to gain another advantage, an academic year advantage over a new set of younger peers. Sports or academics doesn't matter still Gaming the system.

I wonder how many of the accelerated programs in the LI schools are made up of the "older" student body for the grade. And how many are made up of the younger "sept -dec".

In one of my child's grade, over 60% of the students in the ap program have a prior years birth year. 30% are grade birth year jan/mar and 4 (yes 4) are kids with June through Dec birth years correct for the grade.

So why are the 60% in the wrong year, simply because the parents wanted to game the system and make sure their kids were the top in their grade.

I see this in two scenarios. One, well educated wealthy families who saw their college friends do this for years and the moms didn't have to return or go to work. Two, families are doing it with their second or third child. Who after seeing it first hand in their other older children's classes figured why shouldn't I too.

Argue all you want. One side says I'm doing it to further my family and put them in the best situation I can. Why is that so wrong? The other side says by doing what you do you have put my family at a disadvantage. Life is more dumb luck and timing than being good at something. It is truly better to be lucky than to be good.


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
Back of THE CAGE
*
Offline
Back of THE CAGE
*
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I wonder how many of the accelerated programs in the LI schools are made up of the "older" student body for the grade. And how many are made up of the younger "sept -dec".
I can tell you categorically that "accelerated programs" and "academic holdbacks" are diametrically (SAT Word of the Day) opposing terms. In fact, you will more often find students "playing up" in accelerated academic settings. The difference of birth month within the academic calendar year is a non-issue.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
That may be true that he should be in 8th grade but unlike lacrosse when it comes to tournament play he has to play with kids that were born his same year. Wish US Lacrosse would adopt the same system. I believe that a large percentage of the NHL have birthdays in the first three months of their birth year.


The big difference between lacrosse and hockey is the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, for hockey it is the NHL ant they base the draft on Birth year, for lacrosse it is NCAA D1 an they base recruiting on grades so it will never change - my son is a 2000 birth year 2018, I do not want him playing against 2000 birth year 2019's or 2020's because it will do nothing for him from a recruiting point of you,

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
That may be true that he should be in 8th grade but unlike lacrosse when it comes to tournament play he has to play with kids that were born his same year. Wish US Lacrosse would adopt the same system. I believe that a large percentage of the NHL have birthdays in the first three months of their birth year.


The big difference between lacrosse and hockey is the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, for hockey it is the NHL ant they base the draft on Birth year, for lacrosse it is NCAA D1 an they base recruiting on grades so it will never change - my son is a 2000 birth year 2018, I do not want him playing against 2000 birth year 2019's or 2020's because it will do nothing for him from a recruiting point of you,


Can someone please do a birth year comparison on the MLB draft last night? Aren't we all focused on the 1,000 mll game check?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Justify all you want. However you justify it, it all comes down to the same thing. People are trying to help their children. They want to give their child an advantage that will help them in some way.

it is all the same, kindergarden holdback, 9th grade reclass, PG year at prep and non medical redshirt in college.

It is all done to help the kid gain an advantage.


I live in the city and psycho parents here holdback too but for academic advantages. If you have a kid born after June the pvt schools won't even accept them and force you to hold back.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by CageSage
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I wonder how many of the accelerated programs in the LI schools are made up of the "older" student body for the grade. And how many are made up of the younger "sept -dec".
I can tell you categorically that "accelerated programs" and "academic holdbacks" are diametrically (SAT Word of the Day) opposing terms. In fact, you will more often find students "playing up" in accelerated academic settings. The difference of birth month within the academic calendar year is a non-issue.


In my district, the good majority of students playing up academically are the students who should be a year ahead in the first place. gaming the system.


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
If you have $$ and hire private tutors and trainers for your son, and send him to he best camps and training sessions that money can buy (and few of his peers can afford), is that a form of cheating similar to holding back? Is it an unfair advantage? I know families who have bought their sons a hundred or more private sessions at 60 bucks a pop with excellent college players. Is that fair, especially to those of us who cannot afford it?

My son is a very good 8th grader, but he may "lose" a college spot to a holdback. We live in VA near DC and the first three verbals from our area for 2017 are holdbacks. It is a little annoying but, as with love and war, all is fair when it comes to your children. My two cents.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
there are people that can afford to pay to give their kids the best possible shot. For those people I say go have at it. those people still have their kid competing against others hi/her own age.

For other that hold their kid back for an advantage, the have crossed the line. they are cheating because they are taking advantage of other kids that are not as physically or mentally mature. We have all seen the studs that stand head and shoulders above everyone else on the field because they are a year older. Unlike, the age appropriate kid that just hit his growth spurt early...

You can all justify but in your heart of heart, you know you are cheating.

Hope you can sleep well.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
If you have $$ and hire private tutors and trainers for your son, and send him to he best camps and training sessions that money can buy (and few of his peers can afford), is that a form of cheating similar to holding back? Is it an unfair advantage? I know families who have bought their sons a hundred or more private sessions at 60 bucks a pop with excellent college players. Is that fair, especially to those of us who cannot afford it?

My son is a very good 8th grader, but he may "lose" a college spot to a holdback. We live in VA near DC and the first three verbals from our area for 2017 are holdbacks. It is a little annoying but, as with love and war, all is fair when it comes to your children. My two cents.


Working hard, making the most of your advantages, and maximizing one's potential relative to one's peers, is admirable. Providing those advantages and encouragement is good parenting.

Holding a kid back to change his peer group to gain an advantage is gaming the system. There is very little to admire in that situation.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Unc just goes a commit from Texas. 2017 who will be taking a PG. I think that should be a new low, unc taking an effective 8th grader....

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 51
Back of THE CAGE
Offline
Back of THE CAGE
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 51
Originally Posted by CageSage
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Well said VA Lax dad. I have read all of your post. We are on the same page with all of this nonsense . I just wish US Lacrosse would do something about it. Thanks Again. Long Island Lax Dad
BOTC has actually e-mailed our contacts here on Long Island and we have asked that this thread be passed along to our US Lacrosse peers as a lesson in what is really happening on the ground. Would it surprise you to hear that the Long Island organization responded within five minutes ... and the US Lacrosse organization ... well, let's just say we hope that they opened the e-mail.


Very impressive CS. Thank you for reaching out to USL. I registered my son today on a website requiring USL membership. This notice popped up:
Confirmation of Birthdate

If the birth date is incorrect or invalid and results in your child being assigned to an incorrect age group, the US Lacrosse membership for your child and all benefits that accompany membership, including supplemental accident insurance coverage and the ability to play at events that require US Lacrosse membership, may be voided and/or terminated.
Please confirm the birthdate enter is correct. Y/N

This seems like a positive first step. Hopefully they will continue to refine the process



Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
No silly. The 2017 from Texas is really a 2016 who will reclass as a 2017 when he does his pg year. He is currently a sophomore.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Unc just goes a commit from Texas. 2017 who will be taking a PG. I think that should be a new low, unc taking an effective 8th grader....


I think this is a 2016 reclassifying to 2017??? can anyone confirm?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Unc just goes a commit from Texas. 2017 who will be taking a PG. I think that should be a new low, unc taking an effective 8th grader....


I think this is a 2016 reclassifying to 2017??? can anyone confirm?


Oh, God, no!!!!! Now 8th graders are taking 2017 spots away from the precious Long Island boys! Be happy you have good delis and pizza...oh yeah, and Jones Beach

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Unc just goes a commit from Texas. 2017 who will be taking a PG. I think that should be a new low, unc taking an effective 8th grader....


I think this is a 2016 reclassifying to 2017??? can anyone confirm?


Oh, God, no!!!!! Now 8th graders are taking 2017 spots away from the precious Long Island boys! Be happy you have good delis and pizza...oh yeah, and Jones Beach


Uhh that would be a 10th grader... 2016 DOWN to 2017 is a 10th going to 9th. I'll agree on the Deli's pizza and beach though.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Interesting, is this how they do it in Texas for football.

Start Kindergarten late so a 2016 becomes 2017 (but in texas the start date is Sept 1 so late is a relative term), then reclassify in 8th grade so that the original 2016 is no longer a 2017 and now becomes a 2018. Do a PG year on top of that and truly become a 2019.

Someone who should have graduated from college 2020, instead graduates 2023.

Crazy huh.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Unc just goes a commit from Texas. 2017 who will be taking a PG. I think that should be a new low, unc taking an effective 8th grader....


I think this is a 2016 reclassifying to 2017??? can anyone confirm?


Oh, God, no!!!!! Now 8th graders are taking 2017 spots away from the precious Long Island boys! Be happy you have good delis and pizza...oh yeah, and Jones Beach
Maybe you should have been a "Hold Back " to get your grades up, then you would have understood it's a 2016 doing a PG to re-classify as a 2017.What will happen when all the LI parents start holding back to game the system? what will the Md parents do? hold back 2 years? 3 years?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
USL is reluctant to take a stand. The USL could do it in a minute if they wanted to. A calendar cut-off works in hockey universally. Why wouldn't it work in lacrosse?

It is "the haves($$)" vs. the have-nots. The haves ($$) get the early advantage, but the have-nots do catch-up by sophomore/junior year of high school. In Greenwich, CT, an undisputed hot-bed of talent, the public school kids play on the "B" youth teams, and the private school kids play on the "A" youth teams simply due to the size/maturity advantage of the extra year. Yet, by sophomore/junior year of high school, it all evens out. The only folks kidding themselves here are the parents and the D1 coaches making bad choice.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I read Outliers too. Malcolm Gladwell's fact on the NHL stats were contrived. Trust me, the birth months are random. It all evens out. Good athletes will rise to the top of the pack.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I read Outliers too. Malcolm Gladwell's fact on the NHL stats were contrived. Trust me, the birth months are random. It all evens out. Good athletes will rise to the top of the pack.


Have you been to or heard any of his recent forums. Gladwell asserts some of his findings are being screwed due to the obvious fact that once a larger population takes advantage of a situation... it no longer becomes an advantage (in the future and sort of becomes the norm and no longer a benefit)... and for those that are not able to take the advantage it now becomes a significant disadvantage... for those who are not able!




Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I have an idea - why don't we all rally to remove any kid that's better than ours because of cheating!!! Yeah, like those kids bigger and stronger and faster than ours because they had good training and that's not fair. Hey, while we're at it lets get rid of the two handed players because they are ambidextrious and THAT'S not fair. And finally, get rid of all the brainiacs because they all have the best tutors and isn't that cheating, too!


This is a ridiculous post. No one is suggesting any of this. Just suggesting age based.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
USL is reluctant to take a stand. The USL could do it in a minute if they wanted to. A calendar cut-off works in hockey universally. Why wouldn't it work in lacrosse?



it works in hockey because the golden ring in hockey is the NHL draft that is also birth date based, in lacrosse the golden ring is a spot on a college team and that is, was and always will be grade based. Also in hockey you have most kids playing Junior trying to get to the NHL once they realize that is not happening they go to college usually as 20 year old freshman much like a lax player that re-classifies and PG's.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I have an idea - why don't we all rally to remove any kid that's better than ours because of cheating!!! Yeah, like those kids bigger and stronger and faster than ours because they had good training and that's not fair. Hey, while we're at it lets get rid of the two handed players because they are ambidextrious and THAT'S not fair. And finally, get rid of all the brainiacs because they all have the best tutors and isn't that cheating, too!


This is a ridiculous post. No one is suggesting any of this. Just suggesting age based.


Yes, that's what reclass parents say to try to justify their cheating ways!

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I dont care if kids are reclassified. My son has been playing up his whole career. In fact he got his offer because he went to a school camp and played up as a 7th grader against Varsity. He is actually small for his age. The reality is in college you have to play against older bigger faster stronger kids. Get used to it now and you will be much better off for the experience. In the meantime do lots of wall ball. The wall doesnt know your age.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I dont care if kids are reclassified. My son has been playing up his whole career. In fact he got his offer because he went to a school camp and played up as a 7th grader against Varsity. He is actually small for his age. The reality is in college you have to play against older bigger faster stronger kids. Get used to it now and you will be much better off for the experience. In the meantime do lots of wall ball. The wall doesnt know your age.


I think you missed the point!

I too was in a similar situation as you and your son; my son played up from 2nd grade up (and I am not talking a late birthday). I was comfortable moving him up because he was a piece on a team of older boys. Just as your son was playing against older boys he was also playing with older boys. You are only as good as you surround yourself with.

Now I highly doubt you would have played your son up with a full team of other boys on his age. That is the issue. Many of us can state our sons played up but not many can boast they did it with a complete team playing up (sans Turtles and Crush don't need to hear age bickering there).


Also knowing what you are up against is good sportsmanship policy. Choosing to play up verses having to play a team on your schedule (who is supposed to be on age and isn't) is two different things.


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
If you hold your kid back in school for freakin lacrosse they should take your kid away from you. If your child has a change of mind about the sport or has a serious injury or after all your efforts just isn't that good you will look back at your ludicrous decision and say what the [lacrosse] was I thinking?

You are the nuts I watch on HBO's documentary "State Of Play" which is about crazy sport parents and their kid's who hate them.

Do any of you hold back parents know the names of your kid's teachers? Or when their next test is? Or what they got on the last one? Probably not, but you have the lax coaches cell phone number and you can recite your kids stats faster then you can say your phone number. Sad...

Good players will play in college no need for hold backs.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I dont care if kids are reclassified. My son has been playing up his whole career. In fact he got his offer because he went to a school camp and played up as a 7th grader against Varsity. He is actually small for his age. The reality is in college you have to play against older bigger faster stronger kids. Get used to it now and you will be much better off for the experience. In the meantime do lots of wall ball. The wall doesnt know your age.


If your son, as a 7th grader, played against varsity players and earned a scholarship offer, than he is/was one of the top 1% players in the world at his age. You can not take the experiences of a kid this athletic and talented and use it as a guide for all kids in general. It would be like a lottery winner advocating that buying lottery tickets is a sound investment simply because it worked for him.

The large majority of youth players, even including many that play on high level travel teams, will not be able to compete adequately against older players, and as such, will not develop and not have fun.

Moreover, as someone else has said, there is a big difference between choosing to have your son play against older kids (because he is uniquely athletic and talented) vs having it forced upon someone who signed their kid up for a 2020 team, drove him 200 miles to a tournament, only to see him walk onto a field opposite a group of 15 year olds.

And please stop with the wall ball. Yes, tons of wall ball will make you a better player, but it will not affect a boy's inherent speed, athleticism, quickness and strength. For 99% of 7th graders, all the wall ball in the world will not make them competitive against varsity players. For most of them, tons of wall ball is necessary to simply make them competitive against elite kids their own age.

As for the analogy to college, the last I checked, no one is playing college until they are 18 (some may be 17 when they start college but they all should be at least 18 by the time the real games start). At this age, these individuals are essentially men, and can compete with 20 year olds. Telling a 12 or 13 year old to suck it up and play against older kids because they will have to play 20 year olds when they are 18 is just plain silly.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I dont care if kids are reclassified. My son has been playing up his whole career. In fact he got his offer because he went to a school camp and played up as a 7th grader against Varsity. He is actually small for his age. The reality is in college you have to play against older bigger faster stronger kids. Get used to it now and you will be much better off for the experience. In the meantime do lots of wall ball. The wall doesnt know your age.


If your son, as a 7th grader, played against varsity players and earned a scholarship offer, than he is/was one of the top 1% players in the world at his age. You can not take the experiences of a kid this athletic and talented and use it as a guide for all kids in general. It would be like a lottery winner advocating that buying lottery tickets is a sound investment simply because it worked for him.

The large majority of youth players, even including many that play on high level travel teams, will not be able to compete adequately against older players, and as such, will not develop and not have fun.

Moreover, as someone else has said, there is a big difference between choosing to have your son play against older kids (because he is uniquely athletic and talented) vs having it forced upon someone who signed their kid up for a 2020 team, drove him 200 miles to a tournament, only to see him walk onto a field opposite a group of 15 year olds.

And please stop with the wall ball. Yes, tons of wall ball will make you a better player, but it will not affect a boy's inherent speed, athleticism, quickness and strength. For 99% of 7th graders, all the wall ball in the world will not make them competitive against varsity players. For most of them, tons of wall ball is necessary to simply make them competitive against elite kids their own age.

As for the analogy to college, the last I checked, no one is playing college until they are 18 (some may be 17 when they start college but they all should be at least 18 by the time the real games start). At this age, these individuals are essentially men, and can compete with 20 year olds. Telling a 12 or 13 year old to suck it up and play against older kids because they will have to play 20 year olds when they are 18 is just plain silly.


Thank you well said

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I call bull on this one. 7th grader who is small for his age against what varsity players?? Where was it that he was so good or the varsity players were so bad that he stood out enough to get an "OFFER" Because that is all it is an "OFFER". This kid has 5 more seasons of HS ball and if he does not grow or get better or have the grades that "OFFER" can easily go away. In addition 5 years is a long time I hope the coach is still there

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I dont care if kids are reclassified. My son has been playing up his whole career. In fact he got his offer because he went to a school camp and played up as a 7th grader against Varsity. He is actually small for his age. The reality is in college you have to play against older bigger faster stronger kids. Get used to it now and you will be much better off for the experience. In the meantime do lots of wall ball. The wall doesnt know your age.


If your son, as a 7th grader, played against varsity players and earned a scholarship offer, than he is/was one of the top 1% players in the world at his age. You can not take the experiences of a kid this athletic and talented and use it as a guide for all kids in general. It would be like a lottery winner advocating that buying lottery tickets is a sound investment simply because it worked for him.

The large majority of youth players, even including many that play on high level travel teams, will not be able to compete adequately against older players, and as such, will not develop and not have fun.

Moreover, as someone else has said, there is a big difference between choosing to have your son play against older kids (because he is uniquely athletic and talented) vs having it forced upon someone who signed their kid up for a 2020 team, drove him 200 miles to a tournament, only to see him walk onto a field opposite a group of 15 year olds.

And please stop with the wall ball. Yes, tons of wall ball will make you a better player, but it will not affect a boy's inherent speed, athleticism, quickness and strength. For 99% of 7th graders, all the wall ball in the world will not make them competitive against varsity players. For most of them, tons of wall ball is necessary to simply make them competitive against elite kids their own age.

As for the analogy to college, the last I checked, no one is playing college until they are 18 (some may be 17 when they start college but they all should be at least 18 by the time the real games start). At this age, these individuals are essentially men, and can compete with 20 year olds. Telling a 12 or 13 year old to suck it up and play against older kids because they will have to play 20 year olds when they are 18 is just plain silly.


Thank you well said

Oh please. How many guys get drafted in the NFL that termed 'developmental" and need to put mass on. Another year or two of getting bigger is a bonus. Often in the NFL teams are leery of a guy who dleayed college and comes out at 23 or 24 because he peaked. Holding back is a clear advantage and the only ones who claim its fair is the ones who do it

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
The mere fact that your 7th grade son has a "career" spells volumes about you as a parent. Must be a blast in your house. Read about a guy by the name of Todd Marinovich and his "career" very eye opening.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
The mere fact that your 7th grade son has a "career" spells volumes about you as a parent. Must be a blast in your house. Read about a guy by the name of Todd Marinovich and his "career" very eye opening.
why all the hate?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Comparing college football to lacrosse, seriously? One has 100,000 people watching games on any given Saturday and one has 100 people in the stands. One has the potential for players to make 20+million a year in a league and one has a league that pays $200 per game. So if you want to argue holdback at least their MIGHT again MIGHT be a chance at a monster payout in football.

If you are holding your kid back with hopes of a 50% athletic offer your are misguided.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I agree, also its almost never 50 percent. Its maybe 25 percent. Also rhe 100 people in the stands are mostly kids parents. Holding a kid back to play lacrosse. I don't get it. Then everytime your kid plays well, it sits in the back of your head, my son did well, but he is a yr older than everyone else. You can say you don't think about it, you can act like you don't think about it. But you do think about it. Its a legal thing to do, but it isn't the rite thing to do and everyone knows it.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I agree, also its almost never 50 percent. Its maybe 25 percent. Also rhe 100 people in the stands are mostly kids parents. Holding a kid back to play lacrosse. I don't get it. Then everytime your kid plays well, it sits in the back of your head, my son did well, but he is a yr older than everyone else. You can say you don't think about it, you can act like you don't think about it. But you do think about it. Its a legal thing to do, but it isn't the rite thing to do and everyone knows it.


A true stud (of course all holdbacks are studs lol) can get +50% but that is probably less than 1% of the kids. You are right, most GOOD players are fighting for that 15-30% offer.

What's a joke is the parents that are holding kids back, paying $5,000+ a year on summer lax, camps, clinics and travel expenses are usually still only getting .25% SO WHATS THE POINT???

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Parents that do that, travel , camp, clinics etc. There is nothing wrong with that. I do that too. I'm not looking at it, to make money or I should say save money on school one day. I do the same thing for my other son with baseball. I'm giving my kids all the opportunitys to do well, and they are having fun which is most important. However to make a kid repeat a grade, to play lax. Thats crazy. Kids graduating high school at 20. Unreal what people do to get an edge.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Think you need to do a little more research. A four year college degree at a school that is not SUNY will cost $120,000 on average. You don't need to be a stud to get a 50% scholarship. My brother plays at a D2 school, was one of the better players on a not so good HS team, and pays $0 for his college education. He started playing travel lax in 5th grade, so that's 7 years of fees and showcases, so figure about $20,000. I would say that's a pretty good return on investment.

Now he also has a head on his shoulders and does well in school, so if you are one of the crazies who preaches lax all day all night, and your kid can't spell "cat", odds are you won't be getting that scholarship...

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Think you need to do a little more research. A four year college degree at a school that is not SUNY will cost $120,000 on average. You don't need to be a stud to get a 50% scholarship. My brother plays at a D2 school, was one of the better players on a not so good HS team, and pays $0 for his college education. He started playing travel lax in 5th grade, so that's 7 years of fees and showcases, so figure about $20,000. I would say that's a pretty good return on investment.

Now he also has a head on his shoulders and does well in school, so if you are one of the crazies who preaches lax all day all night, and your kid can't spell "cat", odds are you won't be getting that scholarship...


Here's some research for you...12.6 d1 or 10.8 d2 available men's scholarships for rosters of 40 or more kids. There are 59 d1 programs, 47 d2 that's 1251 scholarships a year if all programs use their allotment (and many don't because they aren't fully funded).

So if you just averaged it out, most will get .25-.35 and even more will get ZERO vs a full ride

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Again, keep researching. Does he have a full "athletic" scholarship, of course not. If you are not heavily recruited by major schools, you aren't getting one them. He gets $10,000 a year as a lacrosse scholarship. However, most programs will also offer academic scholarships which are reasonably attainable. He keeps a 3.2 GPA, and that is where the other $20,000 a year comes in.

At the end of four years his lax career will be over but he will be debt free and have a college degree to start his life.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Does anyone have any experience with combining financial aid with athletic scholarship. Does the scholarship money get deducted from the aid money zip?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Does anyone have any experience with combining financial aid with athletic scholarship. Does the scholarship money get deducted from the aid money zip?


Financial Aid (need based) or Academic awards (earned through outstanding academics)?

Most from LI get the second, not the first

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I dont care if kids are reclassified. My son has been playing up his whole career. In fact he got his offer because he went to a school camp and played up as a 7th grader against Varsity. He is actually small for his age. The reality is in college you have to play against older bigger faster stronger kids. Get used to it now and you will be much better off for the experience. In the meantime do lots of wall ball. The wall doesnt know your age.


If your son, as a 7th grader, played against varsity players and earned a scholarship offer, than he is/was one of the top 1% players in the world at his age. You can not take the experiences of a kid this athletic and talented and use it as a guide for all kids in general. It would be like a lottery winner advocating that buying lottery tickets is a sound investment simply because it worked for him.

The large majority of youth players, even including many that play on high level travel teams, will not be able to compete adequately against older players, and as such, will not develop and not have fun.

Moreover, as someone else has said, there is a big difference between choosing to have your son play against older kids (because he is uniquely athletic and talented) vs having it forced upon someone who signed their kid up for a 2020 team, drove him 200 miles to a tournament, only to see him walk onto a field opposite a group of 15 year olds.

And please stop with the wall ball. Yes, tons of wall ball will make you a better player, but it will not affect a boy's inherent speed, athleticism, quickness and strength. For 99% of 7th graders, all the wall ball in the world will not make them competitive against varsity players. For most of them, tons of wall ball is necessary to simply make them competitive against elite kids their own age.

As for the analogy to college, the last I checked, no one is playing college until they are 18 (some may be 17 when they start college but they all should be at least 18 by the time the real games start). At this age, these individuals are essentially men, and can compete with 20 year olds. Telling a 12 or 13 year old to suck it up and play against older kids because they will have to play 20 year olds when they are 18 is just plain silly.


First of all I didn't advocate the playing up posture for everyone. In fact I am the first to admit I probably made a mistake doing this, and unnecessarily put my kid at risk.

All I am saying is 1) my son did play up at an early age,2) it helped him get recruited and 3) it helped him play significantly on varsity as a freshman on a quality team. It is the counter point to all the people who claim holding back gives an unfair advantage as he was small for his age and continues to be undersized.


Yes as you point out he has inherent speed, is athletic, has quickness and strength. However, without the years of wall ball he would not be able to make use of those skills. Wall ball combined with IQ really is what makes the difference. One of the reasons I think I made a mistake with the playing up was my kid became overly reliant on athleticism . As time has gone by, I realize more and more the stick skills are what set kids apart and I think those are better developed in an age appropriate setting which I am doing with my son now.

I am not the only parent that believes playing can be beneficial in certain circumstances.

A great example are the Turtles, they always played up and look where that got them.

I think the held back kids are at a disadvantage. They learn to beat up on less mature kids.




Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I dont care if kids are reclassified. My son has been playing up his whole career. In fact he got his offer because he went to a school camp and played up as a 7th grader against Varsity. He is actually small for his age. The reality is in college you have to play against older bigger faster stronger kids. Get used to it now and you will be much better off for the experience. In the meantime do lots of wall ball. The wall doesnt know your age.


If your son, as a 7th grader, played against varsity players and earned a scholarship offer, than he is/was one of the top 1% players in the world at his age. You can not take the experiences of a kid this athletic and talented and use it as a guide for all kids in general. It would be like a lottery winner advocating that buying lottery tickets is a sound investment simply because it worked for him.

The large majority of youth players, even including many that play on high level travel teams, will not be able to compete adequately against older players, and as such, will not develop and not have fun.

Moreover, as someone else has said, there is a big difference between choosing to have your son play against older kids (because he is uniquely athletic and talented) vs having it forced upon someone who signed their kid up for a 2020 team, drove him 200 miles to a tournament, only to see him walk onto a field opposite a group of 15 year olds.

And please stop with the wall ball. Yes, tons of wall ball will make you a better player, but it will not affect a boy's inherent speed, athleticism, quickness and strength. For 99% of 7th graders, all the wall ball in the world will not make them competitive against varsity players. For most of them, tons of wall ball is necessary to simply make them competitive against elite kids their own age.

As for the analogy to college, the last I checked, no one is playing college until they are 18 (some may be 17 when they start college but they all should be at least 18 by the time the real games start). At this age, these individuals are essentially men, and can compete with 20 year olds. Telling a 12 or 13 year old to suck it up and play against older kids because they will have to play 20 year olds when they are 18 is just plain silly.


First of all I didn't advocate the playing up posture for everyone. In fact I am the first to admit I probably made a mistake doing this, and unnecessarily put my kid at risk.

All I am saying is 1) my son did play up at an early age,2) it helped him get recruited and 3) it helped him play significantly on varsity as a freshman on a quality team. It is the counter point to all the people who claim holding back gives an unfair advantage as he was small for his age and continues to be undersized.


Yes as you point out he has inherent speed, is athletic, has quickness and strength. However, without the years of wall ball he would not be able to make use of those skills. Wall ball combined with IQ really is what makes the difference. One of the reasons I think I made a mistake with the playing up was my kid became overly reliant on athleticism . As time has gone by, I realize more and more the stick skills are what set kids apart and I think those are better developed in an age appropriate setting which I am doing with my son now.

I am not the only parent that believes playing can be beneficial in certain circumstances.

A great example are the Turtles, they always played up and look where that got them.

I think the held back kids are at a disadvantage. They learn to beat up on less mature kids.




I agree with your analysis

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I also agree. This is the first season (2019) that my son is not playing up and I truly believe it helped prepare and push his development.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I also agree. This is the first season (2019) that my son is not playing up and I truly believe it helped prepare and push his development.


Confused, not playing up helped him prepare and develop?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I also agree. This is the first season (2019) that my son is not playing up and I truly believe it helped prepare and push his development.


Confused, not playing up helped him prepare and develop?


Not the poster, but he meant his kid has always played up and has gotten better through the years in doing so, but this year as he is older is playing on age.

Playing up and on age is for the talented kids, in ALL states. It's the way to go. Coaches will notice a talented kid and be more impressed when seen against older kids not younger ones.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I also agree. This is the first season (2019) that my son is not playing up and I truly believe it helped prepare and push his development.


Confused, not playing up helped him prepare and develop?


My son has always played with older kids (played up) and this year he is playing for the first time with kids his age. Playing up over the years (IMO), really helped push his development and he enjoyed the challenge.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
US Lacrosse Adopts New Player Segmentation Policy


US Lacrosse today announced a new player segmentation policy to ensure player safety, competitive fairness and a consistent experience for youth lacrosse. The US Lacrosse Board of Directors approved the policy in January, and it takes effect Sept. 1, 2017 (earlier adoption is encouraged).
Policy highlights include grouping players by single-age years, using Sept. 1 as the determining date for a player's age and as the first day of a 12-month playing calendar, and standardizing nomenclature that lists the age first, i.e., 12U.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
About time. So if your birthday is August 31, you would be the oldest on your team correct?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
correct.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
US Lacrosse Adopts New Player Segmentation Policy

from press release | Twitter

BALTIMORE US Lacrosse, the national governing body for mens and womens lacrosse, has adopted a new player segmentation policy to help ensure player safety, competitive fairness and a consistent experience for youth lacrosse. The policy was approved by the US Lacrosse Board of Directors in January.

In order to allow leagues, programs and events to adjust, the policy will go into effect on September 1, 2017, but groups are encouraged to begin following the policy sooner if logistics permit.

We want this to happen as soon as possible, but we know it will take some time for people to adapt to these changes, said Kristen Murray, vice chair of the US Lacrosse Board of Directors and chair of the task force that recommended the policy. We need to keep driving it forward, because this is whats best for the kids.

Among the notable items in the player segmentation policy:
An emphasis on grouping players by single-age years (12-month span).
Age is based on players age as of September 1 in an attempt to align with the majority of school systems nationwide to allow players to play with people in their own grade level.
Firmly defined playing season that begins its 12-month cycle on September 1.
Standardized nomenclature that lists age first, i.e., 12U.

In order to help leagues and events monitor the age of participants, US Lacrosse has developed an online age verification system, which includes a review of a birth certificate or other legal document to confirm a players birth date.

All of these things player segmentation, age verification, athlete development improve the quality of competition, play and overall experience, said George Leveille, a task force member who also serves as organizer of the popular Summit Lacrosse Tournament in Lake Placid, N.Y. The new player segmentation policy was designed to increase participation by making it a more enjoyable and safer playing experience.

Rules for each age group will be determined by the US Lacrosse rules subcommittees. The rules subcommittees meet each spring and summer to propose rules, which are voted on by the US Lacrosse Board of Directors in September. The rules for each age group will be in sync with the Lacrosse Athlete Development Model, a new initiative for US Lacrosse launched this year.

Members of the lacrosse community wishing to provide input to the rules change process can do so by visiting the following links:

Boys: http://www.uslacrosse.org/rules/boys-rules/boys-rule-change-proposal-form.aspx

Girls: http://www.uslacrosse.org/rules/girls-rules/girls-rule-change-proposal-form.aspx

US Lacrosse recognizes that many leagues and programs are currently grouped in age spans beyond 12 months. For local league and community-based play, organizations may form teams with up to a 24-month age variance if necessary to ensure participation. If two age groups are combined, the even year age should be the maximum age for the paired segment (i.e., 7U/8U) and teams with a greater than 12-month variance must play by the rules for the youngest age group of the team. Local organizations that choose to form teams with a 24-month variance should have appropriate risk management policies and planning in place to ensure that player safety is not compromised.

A chart with the player segmentations for the 2016-17 and 2017-18 seasons is available here.

A task force that included US Lacrosse staff, volunteers, and lacrosse leaders from around the country developed the player segmentation policy. A complete copy of the policy is available on the US Lacrosse web site. Helping to guide the decision making process was a research-based position paper on recommendations for youth lacrosse participation published in 2011.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did the US Lacrosse Board of Directors adopt this policy?

The US Lacrosse Board of Directors adopted the player segmentation policy for three primary reasons: Player safety, competitive fairness and consistent experience for participants.

Why was age chosen to segment players?

Age is the best indicator for determining how to group children due to physical and cognitive development. It is also the most easily verified method to segment players. The new US Lacrosse age verification system will assist leagues and events in ensuring that players are segmented properly. However, the age groupings were designed to align as closely as possible with students grade level in school so that they can participate with their classmates.

What happens if there are not enough players to field a team using the new segmentations?

The task force recognized that some programs will not have enough players to segment by single-aged years. Provisions are included to allow 24-month age segmentations for local league and community-based play, if necessary, to ensure participation. The aim of the policy is to improve the experience for everyone in order increase participation, not discourage it.

Why was September 1 chosen as the start date of the season?

The playing season was firmly defined as September 1 through August 31 of each year to help ensure consistency. The fall date was chosen as the start date for the new season, as the majority of teams use the fall to begin their preparation for the upcoming spring and summer seasons.

Why is the age listed first on the groupings?

The nomenclature for age groupings was changed to have the age listed first for clarity and to allow for a clear break between youth (14U and younger) and scholastic (15U to 18U) lacrosse. Previously, the U15 level was considered youth, but often included age-eligible high school players. Those situations will be limited in the new structure.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
No, August 31 will make you the YOUNGEST on the team.September 1 birthday will be the oldest kid on the team.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
That's a drag for the boys who have Fall birthdays. They will be playing down with kids in a lower grade versus playing with their friends

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
About time. So if your birthday is August 31, you would be the oldest on your team correct?

Youngest.
The oldest is 9/1

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
correct.


I don't think so. Guidelines on USL website show 9/1 through 8/31 as one tranche. An August birthday would be the youngest on the team. Correct me if I got that wrong.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
The sad thing is that it might take a catastrophic injury to a player that is a year and a half younger and 50 pounds lighter for US Lacrosse to rethink to whole process. Isn't that why [lacrosse] football in most states have weight limits for players ? Yes I know that every once in a while there is the young man who's Dad played in the NFL and who's Mom played in the WNBA who is just going to be big for his age. Thats just lucky genetics not working/cheating the system. Seems like the MD. parents are pretty quiet on this topic. Come up north this summer and bring your birth certificates or better yet have US Lacrosse start issuing player I.D. when memberships are payed. Lets just even the playing field. Don't you want to win fair and square ? I would.


are you joking? those people don't give a damn about fair and square.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
About time. So if your birthday is August 31, you would be the oldest on your team correct?


Youngest. A Sept 1st birthday would be the oldest.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I just read the release. So my son who is Nov 2002 birthday is presently in 8th grade and plays 2020 will be reclassified next year/summer (2017) to U14 (8th grade equivalent) and be the equivalent of reclassified to 2021 for tournaments with travel and play 8th graders even though he will have finished his first year of high school?

Am I understanding this correctly?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
You can always play up but you cannot play down. your son can keep playing 'up' with his grade. You have a choice now.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I think the idea is to do away with grade based play completely

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I just read the release. So my son who is Nov 2002 birthday is presently in 8th grade and plays 2020 will be reclassified next year/summer (2017) to U14 (8th grade equivalent) and be the equivalent of reclassified to 2021 for tournaments with travel and play 8th graders even though he will have finished his first year of high school?

Am I understanding this correctly?


Yes but you can always play up.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
But US Lacrosse guidelines are not used by anyone today in competitive lacrosse which is where the issue really lies. Why would this be expected to change?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I just read the release. So my son who is Nov 2002 birthday is presently in 8th grade and plays 2020 will be reclassified next year/summer (2017) to U14 (8th grade equivalent) and be the equivalent of reclassified to 2021 for tournaments with travel and play 8th graders even though he will have finished his first year of high school?

Am I understanding this correctly?


Don't over complicate it. He will be playing with and against only kids who were born on or between September 1, 2002 and August 31, 2003. Who cares what grade the kids are in.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I just read the release. So my son who is Nov 2002 birthday is presently in 8th grade and plays 2020 will be reclassified next year/summer (2017) to U14 (8th grade equivalent) and be the equivalent of reclassified to 2021 for tournaments with travel and play 8th graders even though he will have finished his first year of high school?

Am I understanding this correctly?


You are correct. He will not be forced to play down a grade he can still play up with his classmates if you choose to. He can not play down a grade if he chooses to reclassify

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I just read the release. So my son who is Nov 2002 birthday is presently in 8th grade and plays 2020 will be reclassified next year/summer (2017) to U14 (8th grade equivalent) and be the equivalent of reclassified to 2021 for tournaments with travel and play 8th graders even though he will have finished his first year of high school?

Am I understanding this correctly?


You are correct. He will not be forced to play down a grade he can still play up with his classmates if you choose to. He can not play down a grade if he chooses to reclassify
Ha and isn't that the way it should be? I'd love to know the number of kids who decide against repeating 8/9th grade this Fall.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I just read the release. So my son who is Nov 2002 birthday is presently in 8th grade and plays 2020 will be reclassified next year/summer (2017) to U14 (8th grade equivalent) and be the equivalent of reclassified to 2021 for tournaments with travel and play 8th graders even though he will have finished his first year of high school?

Am I understanding this correctly?


You are correct. He will not be forced to play down a grade he can still play up with his classmates if you choose to. He can not play down a grade if he chooses to reclassify
Ha and isn't that the way it should be? I'd love to know the number of kids who decide against repeating 8/9th grade this Fall.



my son has a late nov 2002 birthday and will not repeat 8th grade . has too many close friends to hold back


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
rule is for sandbagging parents. Play up as high as you like just no more cheating hold backs and playing down

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Hopefully these age guidelines will become the norm but club teams, tournaments have a lot invested in grade system. USL makes guidelines but doesnt have power to force on tournaments or leagues they dont directly run. Theyve always advocated age guidelines but with 2 year gaps u11,u13 etc. So this is only a start and it will be interesting to see if clubs and tournaments follow.

also i think this is for youth lacrosse not HS. So in the case of a fall bday in NY, he'd be among the older kids (at least locally) and play with and against kids in the grade below during his youth days. Then in 9th grade become one of the youngest. Could be good or bad for that kid depending on your viewpoint

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I am very curious about several aspects:
1. How will most of the clubs implement this rule in the "suggested" season (2016-17). (I know the current season is just starting.)

2. How will the tournaments respond?

3. How will U.S Lacrosse implement verification? Anyone who has been a member for X number of years is grandfathered. all new players submit proof to a "certifying official" at a US Lacrosse sanctioned tournament. Or leave it to the coaches. Who would have to provide proof

As a former certifying official for Basketball, I had a 6-ft kid who used his 8th grade brothers birth certificate to try to play 15U. (He was a older sophomore). (Hint: do not drive yourself to the verification)

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Why are people getting so worked up over this? If your kid is in the right age based group you are fine. If not, sounds like you will have some choices to make. As others have posted, soccer and hockey has already been doing this. If people are going to try and get over these are the same people trying to game the system now.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I'm sure next summer all tryouts will be based on the new age requirements. You'll have the opportunity to play up or have your child play in their appropriate age group.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I'm sure next summer all tryouts will be based on the new age requirements. You'll have the opportunity to play up or have your child play in their appropriate age group.


Think you are going to be disappointed if you believe this. The clubs won't change. USL has no power to enforce this.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I'm sure next summer all tryouts will be based on the new age requirements. You'll have the opportunity to play up or have your child play in their appropriate age group.


Think you are going to be disappointed if you believe this. The clubs won't change. USL has no power to enforce this.


What about insurance? Don't many tournaments require players to be US Lacrosse registered for insurance purposes? I'm not saying the insurance actually does much, but I'd think that US Lax would make playing at the appropriate age level a condition of having coverage under their insurance. My girls' club is making sure that every single player is US Lax registered before the first practice by confirming it directly with US Lax.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I think the power goes to the schools and the municipalities/parks where the games are played. They will have to require that the tournament is sanctioned buy the governing body of the sport...

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I'm sure next summer all tryouts will be based on the new age requirements. You'll have the opportunity to play up or have your child play in their appropriate age group.


Think you are going to be disappointed if you believe this. The clubs won't change. USL has no power to enforce this.


What about insurance? Don't many tournaments require players to be US Lacrosse registered for insurance purposes? I'm not saying the insurance actually does much, but I'd think that US Lax would make playing at the appropriate age level a condition of having coverage under their insurance. My girls' club is making sure that every single player is US Lax registered before the first practice by confirming it directly with US Lax.


I can't remember the last time I had to enter my son's US Lacrosse number for a tournament. Not even sure it it's active. Most big tournaments are run by clubs now and they can do what they want.

The only way this could change is the spring leagues, like HOCO in Maryland, tell the clubs they are changing to age based. But they don't require USL membership, so they don't have to follow the new standard either.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I'm sure next summer all tryouts will be based on the new age requirements. You'll have the opportunity to play up or have your child play in their appropriate age group.


Think you are going to be disappointed if you believe this. The clubs won't change. USL has no power to enforce this.


What about insurance? Don't many tournaments require players to be US Lacrosse registered for insurance purposes? I'm not saying the insurance actually does much, but I'd think that US Lax would make playing at the appropriate age level a condition of having coverage under their insurance. My girls' club is making sure that every single player is US Lax registered before the first practice by confirming it directly with US Lax.


I can't remember the last time I had to enter my son's US Lacrosse number for a tournament. Not even sure it it's active. Most big tournaments are run by clubs now and they can do what they want.

The only way this could change is the spring leagues, like HOCO in Maryland, tell the clubs they are changing to age based. But they don't require USL membership, so they don't have to follow the new standard either.


I wonder if the fields that are rented will have the power. because if no one pays will the paying customer get the field but then if someone is hurt everyone gets sued in this day and age

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I will answer this.

My son is an on-age 2020 (May 2002). For the most part in Maryland (and elsewhere?), teams have their last tryouts for the boys in their freshman year and that team continues playing in summer (and some fall) tourneys throughout the high school years. Yes there are some additions and subtractions, but for the most part the "core" stays the same. So to the 2020s, in particular, how clubs implement the changes could be critical to this age group.

I have asked our club owner what he plans to do, and he has not yet decided whether to "bite the bullet" next year yet. He said he looked at the rosters and thinks that the private school holdbacks on the 2021 can replace the private school holdbacks on the 2020 and upwards. Since lacrosse is still a relatively small community, I am sure the bar room meetings will be taking place during the summer season.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Keep crying, LI dads.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I just read the release. So my son who is Nov 2002 birthday is presently in 8th grade and plays 2020 will be reclassified next year/summer (2017) to U14 (8th grade equivalent) and be the equivalent of reclassified to 2021 for tournaments with travel and play 8th graders even though he will have finished his first year of high school?

Am I understanding this correctly?


Don't over complicate it. He will be playing with and against only kids who were born on or between September 1, 2002 and August 31, 2003. Who cares what grade the kids are in.


Well that's really the question isn't it? Who cares? Do college coaches care? do they care now and do they factor chronological age in? So in the example above this boy can play high school JV as a freshman (against freshmen and sophomores)and then play for a club team in the summer as a u14 against mostly 8th graders. As he moves on and plays in recruiting tournaments, will this get factored in? I can see a scenario where he is a little behind the curve as a HS player then a standout on the travel team. Will this affect how kids are evaluated and recruited?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
But US Lacrosse guidelines are not used by anyone today in competitive lacrosse which is where the issue really lies. Why would this be expected to change?


Have heard that most clubs dont care about this. I spoke to the director of our club, and "we have all talked about it with other clubs, but dont expect anything to change. Its just not that big of a deal, and kids want to play in their actual grades."

Will be interesting how this shakes out - or if its just a non issue

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I just read the release. So my son who is Nov 2002 birthday is presently in 8th grade and plays 2020 will be reclassified next year/summer (2017) to U14 (8th grade equivalent) and be the equivalent of reclassified to 2021 for tournaments with travel and play 8th graders even though he will have finished his first year of high school?

Am I understanding this correctly?


Don't over complicate it. He will be playing with and against only kids who were born on or between September 1, 2002 and August 31, 2003. Who cares what grade the kids are in.


Well that's really the question isn't it? Who cares? Do college coaches care? do they care now and do they factor chronological age in? So in the example above this boy can play high school JV as a freshman (against freshmen and sophomores)and then play for a club team in the summer as a u14 against mostly 8th graders. As he moves on and plays in recruiting tournaments, will this get factored in? I can see a scenario where he is a little behind the curve as a HS player then a standout on the travel team. Will this affect how kids are evaluated and recruited?


I maintain that the best way for a college coach to access youth players is to watch them play against kids their own age. Watching a 16 year old dominate 14 year olds tells me very little about how that 16 year old will play when he is 20. Offering him would make me very nervous since those 14 year olds will catch up physically when they get to age 18 or so.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Why is everyone surprised? Anyone that follows the sport knew the clubs were going to do what was best for them and not US lacrosse. Clubs run the sport and US is a gutless useless powerless organization (except for insurance). What a shame that this isn't going to stick. Just like there will never be player cards. Can we please stop talking about all of US Lax' initiatives that are never going to happen.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
What, if anything, is known about a service called "Athletic Passport"?

I have been asked by the organizers of a tournament to sign up for the service to verify my son's eligibility regarding age/grade.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
US Lacrosse needs to step up & have more age based tournaments!!

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
US Lacrosse needs to step up & have more age based tournaments!!


Agreed. And if the clubs were smart they would get on board. Just like all businesses, I am sure they want to grow. Regarding kids that are talented enough to play in college, there is no growth left. Its a small, limited pool of kids that are already playing. There is room to grow with the more mediocre athlete who just loves to play, but needs to compete against same age kids. The families of these kids are much more easily turned off by age discrepancies in competition.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
US Lacrosse needs to step up & have more age based tournaments!!


Agreed. And if the clubs were smart they would get on board. Just like all businesses, I am sure they want to grow. Regarding kids that are talented enough to play in college, there is no growth left. Its a small, limited pool of kids that are already playing. There is room to grow with the more mediocre athlete who just loves to play, but needs to compete against same age kids. The families of these kids are much more easily turned off by age discrepancies in competition.


I have a bridge to sell you, a very expensive one that we drive over every weekend on our way to MD to make these tournament promoters and club directors MILLIONAIRS! US Lax is a an absolute JOKE!

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
If you want your child to play in age-based tournaments, with card checks, then seek out those tournaments. If none exist and there is so much angst against grade based, then starting one should be no problem. If your club won't do it, then start a new club with all the parents who want age based. Why do you complain and then wait for someone else to solve your problems??? Get out of your SUV and get involved. Otherwise, ... let the kids play.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
It is a way to get you to pay 10 dollars for age verification and the tournament operator gets 3 dollars from every registrant. If the tournament operator wants to have a proof of age service, then they should pay for it. Not us.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Its a mess, as always. Why does hockey/soccer work so well? Is it because there is little high school recruiting? I was at our practice tonight (2022) and the coach said that there is nothing changing. At all. It was talked about as a organization.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Its a mess, as always. Why does hockey/soccer work so well? Is it because there is little high school recruiting? I was at our practice tonight (2022) and the coach said that there is nothing changing. At all. It was talked about as a organization.


because soccer isn't recruiting kids in kindergarten

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Its a mess, as always. Why does hockey/soccer work so well? Is it because there is little high school recruiting? I was at our practice tonight (2022) and the coach said that there is nothing changing. At all. It was talked about as a organization.


because soccer isn't recruiting kids in kindergarten


Get your facts straight, girls soccer recruits 7th and 8th graders. Look into it.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I just read the release. So my son who is Nov 2002 birthday is presently in 8th grade and plays 2020 will be reclassified next year/summer (2017) to U14 (8th grade equivalent) and be the equivalent of reclassified to 2021 for tournaments with travel and play 8th graders even though he will have finished his first year of high school?

Am I understanding this correctly?


Don't over complicate it. He will be playing with and against only kids who were born on or between September 1, 2002 and August 31, 2003. Who cares what grade the kids are in.


Well that's really the question isn't it? Who cares? Do college coaches care? do they care now and do they factor chronological age in? So in the example above this boy can play high school JV as a freshman (against freshmen and sophomores)and then play for a club team in the summer as a u14 against mostly 8th graders. As he moves on and plays in recruiting tournaments, will this get factored in? I can see a scenario where he is a little behind the curve as a HS player then a standout on the travel team. Will this affect how kids are evaluated and recruited?


PS the tournament teams that win will collect the older kids. So the discrepancy at the top will be even smaller.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I just read the release. So my son who is Nov 2002 birthday is presently in 8th grade and plays 2020 will be reclassified next year/summer (2017) to U14 (8th grade equivalent) and be the equivalent of reclassified to 2021 for tournaments with travel and play 8th graders even though he will have finished his first year of high school?

Am I understanding this correctly?


Don't over complicate it. He will be playing with and against only kids who were born on or between September 1, 2002 and August 31, 2003. Who cares what grade the kids are in.


Well that's really the question isn't it? Who cares? Do college coaches care? do they care now and do they factor chronological age in? So in the example above this boy can play high school JV as a freshman (against freshmen and sophomores)and then play for a club team in the summer as a u14 against mostly 8th graders. As he moves on and plays in recruiting tournaments, will this get factored in? I can see a scenario where he is a little behind the curve as a HS player then a standout on the travel team. Will this affect how kids are evaluated and recruited?


PS the tournament teams that win will collect the older kids. So the discrepancy at the top will be even smaller.


bbbbbbbbingo. Nothing going to change. To 95% of players, it just doesnt matter...


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I just read the release. So my son who is Nov 2002 birthday is presently in 8th grade and plays 2020 will be reclassified next year/summer (2017) to U14 (8th grade equivalent) and be the equivalent of reclassified to 2021 for tournaments with travel and play 8th graders even though he will have finished his first year of high school?

Am I understanding this correctly?


Don't over complicate it. He will be playing with and against only kids who were born on or between September 1, 2002 and August 31, 2003. Who cares what grade the kids are in.


Well that's really the question isn't it? Who cares? Do college coaches care? do they care now and do they factor chronological age in? So in the example above this boy can play high school JV as a freshman (against freshmen and sophomores)and then play for a club team in the summer as a u14 against mostly 8th graders. As he moves on and plays in recruiting tournaments, will this get factored in? I can see a scenario where he is a little behind the curve as a HS player then a standout on the travel team. Will this affect how kids are evaluated and recruited?


PS the tournament teams that win will collect the older kids. So the discrepancy at the top will be even smaller.


bbbbbbbbingo. Nothing going to change. To 95% of players, it just doesnt matter...



That is the truth. Kids want to play with their grade. Enough already. Next.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Fairness is just one of the issues. Safety is another and more important issue. Lacrosse is a contact sport and having an 18 year old pummel a 16 year old who has yet to fill out is just plain dangerous. High level hockey recognizes this and teams are all by birth year. Lacrosse should change the rules.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
All sports should be done by birth year not grad year
Period

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
All sports should be done by birth year not grad year
Period

even ping pong?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Fairness is just one of the issues. Safety is another and more important issue. Lacrosse is a contact sport and having an 18 year old pummel a 16 year old who has yet to fill out is just plain dangerous. High level hockey recognizes this and teams are all by birth year. Lacrosse should change the rules.


Firstly, "lacrosse" is not an entity or person. Secondly shut up. Lastly, let's just humor you for a minute - So on average, we'll have senior class varsity teams with 14 kids, junior class varsity teams with 12 kids, sophomore class varsity teams of 9 kids, freshman varsity team with 3 kids. Then, we will have a sophmore class JV team with 15 kids, and a freshman class JV team with 17 kids. Once we hire the extra 4 coaching staffs and work out the fields we should be good to go. Brilliant!!!!!!! Where have you been all of our lives!!!!!!

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
All sports should be done by birth year not grad year
Period

even ping pong?


Originally Posted by Anonymous
All sports should be done by birth year not grad year
Period


Couple hundred thousand coaching staffs just kind of sitting around waiting for the call up?
Wait, why not exact day of birth? Although, some of those early morning births could gain an advantage from the afternoon kids.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
All sports should be done by birth year not grad year
Period

even ping pong?


Originally Posted by Anonymous
All sports should be done by birth year not grad year
Period


Couple hundred thousand coaching staffs just kind of sitting around waiting for the call up?
Wait, why not exact day of birth? Although, some of those early morning births could gain an advantage from the afternoon kids.


Thanks dad
I'm sure you enjoy watching JR play varsity as a 8 grader
But his bday would make him a sophomore
Not impressed

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
All sports should be done by birth year not grad year
Period

even ping pong?


Originally Posted by Anonymous
All sports should be done by birth year not grad year
Period


Couple hundred thousand coaching staffs just kind of sitting around waiting for the call up?
Wait, why not exact day of birth? Although, some of those early morning births could gain an advantage from the afternoon kids.


Thanks dad
I'm sure you enjoy watching JR play varsity as a 8 grader
But his bday would make him a sophomore
Not impressed

Not all dad's that think this way have older 8th graders. Mine was only 13. Birthday was two days after the playoffs.

Still burns me he went up against 16year olds that say they are only one grad year over him. F'n cheaters. Their Kid can't handle themselves so you hold back so he looks better. I always thought you should challenge your kid.

Boy oh. Boy what was I thinking. And wait what is this I think we may hold back $hit so he can play a year younger. When was this acceptable practice.

You play your HS graduation year. That is what the year means. It doesn't mean the year you enter college.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Agreed and they should also require picture ID like soccer does.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Fairness is just one of the issues. Safety is another and more important issue. Lacrosse is a contact sport and having an 18 year old pummel a 16 year old who has yet to fill out is just plain dangerous. High level hockey recognizes this and teams are all by birth year. Lacrosse should change the rules.


Firstly, "lacrosse" is not an entity or person. Secondly shut up. Lastly, let's just humor you for a minute - So on average, we'll have senior class varsity teams with 14 kids, junior class varsity teams with 12 kids, sophomore class varsity teams of 9 kids, freshman varsity team with 3 kids. Then, we will have a sophmore class JV team with 15 kids, and a freshman class JV team with 17 kids. Once we hire the extra 4 coaching staffs and work out the fields we should be good to go. Brilliant!!!!!!! Where have you been all of our lives!!!!!!


I think they are talking about club. You seem to be talking about High school lax.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
There should not be more than 11 month difference between the oldest and youngest kid by grad year. unless your kid was left back. If he was, then he should probably bring focusing on school and not lacrosse. even kids the same age can have a 30lb -40lb difference between them. So if it's the size of the boys you have an issue with. Then seperate them by weight classes and not age. If your a parent that is playing your 7th grader at the 6th grade level. Then shame on you for separating your kid from kids in his grade and kids going through the same experiences.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
I have bad news for you all from MD. Part of the problem here is somewhere around 2001 the idiots who run the public schools pushed the cut off date to begin kindergarten up to September 1st. So, they essential taken anyone born in September through December and forced them to be held back a grade. My son was born in October 2003 but he just finished 7th grade. Previously he would be finishing 8th grade. He looks like he's in 10th grade.

My youngest son starts kindergarten this fall. He was born in October 2011. I've pleaded with Baltimore county schools to let him go early but they refuse. So he's being forced back too. Here is the bad news....I've been told they are pushing that cutoff up even further to June 1st to begin kindergarten. So any child not 5 by may 31st will be forced back a grade. It sucks and is ridiculous. So now the hold backs will be even older

Sorry. Blame the fools at MD public schools!!!

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Fairness is just one of the issues. Safety is another and more important issue. Lacrosse is a contact sport and having an 18 year old pummel a 16 year old who has yet to fill out is just plain dangerous. High level hockey recognizes this and teams are all by birth year. Lacrosse should change the rules.


Hands down one of the most ridiculous posts on here ever. Baseball is more for you friend! My so. Was a 150 pound Sophomore on varsity. He did just fine.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
My son is right in the middle of the pack for his school year (if you look at on age "normal" age kids), so he has always been able to hold his own. But it was always frustrating when he would play against kids from other teams who have been held back a year or two, sometimes they would literally just blow right by him! But, this summer (he is 2020 class) things seem to have evened out quite a bit, he has been loving kicking "holdback" butt. Kids he could never handle for the last few years he can now compete with, it has been very fun to watch. I have to admit, that some of the "holdback" kids must be struggling this summer because they don't stand out like they used to!

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I have bad news for you all from MD. Part of the problem here is somewhere around 2001 the idiots who run the public schools pushed the cut off date to begin kindergarten up to September 1st. So, they essential taken anyone born in September through December and forced them to be held back a grade. My son was born in October 2003 but he just finished 7th grade. Previously he would be finishing 8th grade. He looks like he's in 10th grade.

My youngest son starts kindergarten this fall. He was born in October 2011. I've pleaded with Baltimore county schools to let him go early but they refuse. So he's being forced back too. Here is the bad news....I've been told they are pushing that cutoff up even further to June 1st to begin kindergarten. So any child not 5 by may 31st will be forced back a grade. It sucks and is ridiculous. So now the hold backs will be even older

Sorry. Blame the fools at MD public schools!!!


I am not following you?? MD is Sept 1 now starting any grade ..... If they change it to June 1 ...then it will make the the kids that used to be June 1 to Sept 1 go down a grade ... ..not up???

That is what most MIAA schools do to summer babies..after kindergarten make them go to a made up grade between Kindergarten and 1st called prefirst grade..which is basically hold them back from June 1 to Sept 1

Your Oct child may be on the older side for his age and big, but he is at the proper age for a Md public school and most of schools in country. My understanding is that NY is more in line with what you say about a Dec start for school. Md has always been Sept like most schools in country.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I have bad news for you all from MD. Part of the problem here is somewhere around 2001 the idiots who run the public schools pushed the cut off date to begin kindergarten up to September 1st. So, they essential taken anyone born in September through December and forced them to be held back a grade. My son was born in October 2003 but he just finished 7th grade. Previously he would be finishing 8th grade. He looks like he's in 10th grade.

My youngest son starts kindergarten this fall. He was born in October 2011. I've pleaded with Baltimore county schools to let him go early but they refuse. So he's being forced back too. Here is the bad news....I've been told they are pushing that cutoff up even further to June 1st to begin kindergarten. So any child not 5 by may 31st will be forced back a grade. It sucks and is ridiculous. So now the hold backs will be even older

Sorry. Blame the fools at MD public schools!!!


I am not following you?? MD is Sept 1 now starting any grade ..... If they change it to June 1 ...then it will make the the kids that used to be June 1 to Sept 1 go down a grade ... ..not up???

That is what most MIAA schools do to summer babies..after kindergarten make them go to a made up grade between Kindergarten and 1st called prefirst grade..which is basically hold them back from June 1 to Sept 1

Your Oct child may be on the older side for his age and big, but he is at the proper age for a Md public school and most of schools in country. My understanding is that NY is more in line with what you say about a Dec start for school. Md has always been Sept like most schools in country.


Maryland public did change the cutoff starting with the 2001 babies but that is not what is being discussed here. September 1 change was to be in line with most of the country - NY being an exception that remains at December. Hold backs are kids that either do a full year of pre first, the parents hold them a year later for kindergarten or hold back a grade before high school. Kids born between September and December in Maryland are in the proper grad year and in line with most of the country and the old lacrosse age requirements which used September 1. Any kid born before that September 1st date is a holdback or to be gentler, in the wrong grade.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
If you can legally give your kid an extra year of school, do it if you want. I held my kid back and think it is great. Worry about your own kids, cheapskate mfer's. Suck it.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
If you can legally give your kid an extra year of school, do it if you want. I held my kid back and think it is great. Worry about your own kids, cheapskate mfer's. Suck it.


Actually it was the arrogant mfer who had to suck it when my on age son took the starting spot from the 20 yr old freshman. Parents got humble real quick.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
You can rationalize away all day long why your 16 and 17 year old with a drivers license is in 9th grade. Billy was a slow learner, summer birthday, etc. Just admit it - you held him back in the 8th grade along with a bunch of his private school/FCA/Crabs/Loonies pals in order to gain an advantage over on age kids so he could get a verbal commitment. OWN IT.

Age based classification in youth lacrosse is coming. Deny it all you want - but your little club of man children and obnoxious parents is in peril.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
My daughter (a 2020 who just turned 15) commented when leaving the UA Command banquet that some of the boys really need to shave if they want to pass as that age group. We live in an area where there are not as many holdbacks, so she's not used to seeing boys her grade who are that old.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
My daughter (a 2020 who just turned 15) commented when leaving the UA Command banquet that some of the boys really need to shave if they want to pass as that age group. We live in an area where there are not as many holdbacks, so she's not used to seeing boys her grade who are that old.


My kid is 13 and needs to shave. Your comment means nothing. Don't make assumptions.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
If you can legally give your kid an extra year of school, do it if you want. I held my kid back and think it is great. Worry about your own kids, cheapskate mfer's. Suck it.


No one cares if you hold your kid back to repeat a grade in school. What people are complaining about is a system that allows him to play lacrosse against younger kids because of it.

Kids should play youth sports - not school sports - against kids of similar age. A one year window (calendar year or sept to aug or something else) has been proven in other sports to work well. It shouldn't matter what grade they are in.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
My daughter (a 2020 who just turned 15) commented when leaving the UA Command banquet that some of the boys really need to shave if they want to pass as that age group. We live in an area where there are not as many holdbacks, so she's not used to seeing boys her grade who are that old.


My kid is 13 and needs to shave. Your comment means nothing. Don't make assumptions.


Notice that she said boys - as in plural. Of course some kids may still be 13 and need to shave. Yours is one of them. But a team with several of them - of course they are not all 13. Don't be silly.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
My daughter (a 2020 who just turned 15) commented when leaving the UA Command banquet that some of the boys really need to shave if they want to pass as that age group. We live in an area where there are not as many holdbacks, so she's not used to seeing boys her grade who are that old.


My kid is 13 and needs to shave. Your comment means nothing. Don't make assumptions.


Part gorilla?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
My daughter (a 2020 who just turned 15) commented when leaving the UA Command banquet that some of the boys really need to shave if they want to pass as that age group. We live in an area where there are not as many holdbacks, so she's not used to seeing boys her grade who are that old.


My kid is 13 and needs to shave. Your comment means nothing. Don't make assumptions.

I agree that you cannot assume that someone is too old because they are shaving. Because my son was born in 2002 and is "on age" for 2020 and he has been shaving for at least 18 months

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
In NY, if you are in the public schools, being a holdback is problamatic. You can't play HS sports if you are 19 before the start of the season. So, anyone who is trying to play that game, must either go the private school route or pay the consequences.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
US lacrosse should enact penalties against clubs and individuals that intentionally violate the USlax age and grade guidelines. Clubs and players found guilty should be prohibited from attending U-19 and USA World team tryouts.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
So post the DOBs of the 2020 kids that were on the team. A 2019 player should be born in 01. A 2020 in 02.

2019's

1 5/99
1 9/99
2 11/99
1 12/99
2 1/00
1 2/00
3 3/00
3 4/00
2 5/00
1 6/00
7 7/00
10 8/00
16 9/00
13 10/00
7 11/00
9 12/00
6 1/01
9 2/01
5 3/01
6 4/01
4 5/01
3 7/01

2020's
1 4/01
1 7/01
3 8/01
2 9/01
3 11/01
1 12/01
1 2/02
2 4/02
1/ 5/02


Here is some interesting numbers from Under Armour Command Division (Rising 9th and 10th graders) last year. This year UA has decided to NOT post birthdays like last year. Wonder Why??

Out of 112 players that are 2019 last year,,,, 34 were heldback, prefirst, reclassed or whatever you want to call it .....Thats a bunch!!

So 30% of players couldnt play if they went by USL age guidelines of Sept 1 or like most schools of a Sept 1 start for beginning of school . I know its HS so age doesnt matter but it looks like reclass works.

Out of 15 players that are 2020 last year ,,, 5 were heldback, prefirst,reclassed or whatever you want to call it.

Thats 33% of players .......

So basically around ONE THIRD of all players in Command last year were heldback!!!!! WOW!!!!

And to add to that, around One third 33% of All players are born From Sept -Dec from both 2019 and 2020..So you have a good shot if you are on the older side for proper age of your grade.


Being older works according to this. At least for UA .. Strong conclusions that if your son is born between Jan and Aug and you/he is interested in lacrosse...Might want to hold him back!

These are for numbers after start of puberty for boys which does even things out some( doesn't look like a lot at this age) , can you imagine advantage at youth for older players prior to puberty.


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
In NY, if you are in the public schools, being a holdback is problamatic. You can't play HS sports if you are 19 before the start of the season. So, anyone who is trying to play that game, must either go the private school route or pay the consequences.


MIAA in Baltimore has same rule.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
All over country, public and private schools have varying curriculums, where private more likely to promote extra year, been going on for years. 16-19 year olds been playing varsity together and against each other's tfor years. No news, no story, just some libs grabbing a talking point in order to criticize others not just like them. My 16 year old rising sophomore has the same rights as your 15 year old sophomore, because says 'Merica.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
All over country, public and private schools have varying curriculums, where private more likely to promote extra year, been going on for years. 16-19 year olds been playing varsity together and against each other's tfor years. No news, no story, just some libs grabbing a talking point in order to criticize others not just like them. My 16 year old rising sophomore has the same rights as your 15 year old sophomore, because says 'Merica.



That now has shifted down to YOUTH sports.. No one cared when the holdbacks HS teams usually played other holdback teams in HS..

Now we have select age wise 5th graders playing 4th graders.. When did the private schools dictate what goes on in ALL youth sports??

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
With the topic of prep vs public being brought up ... reclassification (and PG year) helps preps in a major way. It is stupid for national rankings hypesters to even include a school like Deerfield or Brunswick in same category as Cold Spring. Public schools cannot openly recruit 19 year olds to come play for free for a year. And don't get me started on including IMG Academy in the mix. Those "top" prep schools just want to brag about national rankings with their incredibly old and recruited rosters. They know damn well they are an unfair advantage and they love it.

In Westchester and Fairfield, the holdback fever has taken over the youth level because these ultra-rich kids know they are headed to preps where being older than others isn't just accepted, it is encouraged or even forced. It is the "get ahead by any means necessary" approach their parents embrace.

Can you imagine pulling your kid out of one of the best public schools in the country, paying $35,000 to have your kid repeat 6th grade, then relying on a Brunswick varsity spot where the pot at the end of the rainbow is admission to Duke? That is what these types call a plan, not a dream.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.



Thanks captain obvious! Hence the push by many to get lax to go age-based!

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
With the topic of prep vs public being brought up ... reclassification (and PG year) helps preps in a major way. It is stupid for national rankings hypesters to even include a school like Deerfield or Brunswick in same category as Cold Spring. Public schools cannot openly recruit 19 year olds to come play for free for a year. And don't get me started on including IMG Academy in the mix. Those "top" prep schools just want to brag about national rankings with their incredibly old and recruited rosters. They know damn well they are an unfair advantage and they love it.

In Westchester and Fairfield, the holdback fever has taken over the youth level because these ultra-rich kids know they are headed to preps where being older than others isn't just accepted, it is encouraged or even forced. It is the "get ahead by any means necessary" approach their parents embrace.

Can you imagine pulling your kid out of one of the best public schools in the country, paying $35,000 to have your kid repeat 6th grade, then relying on a Brunswick varsity spot where the pot at the end of the rainbow is admission to Duke? That is what these types call a plan, not a dream.


I have no problem with an uber rich Westchester/Fairfield kid repeating a grade. Many of these families decide at birth that the kid will be going to Brunswick or a similar school. Lax players or not, many of these kids are 16 or so as Freshman (especially by the end of the year). So its reasonable (maybe) that they don't want their kid to be the odd 14 year old. And if the kid proves to be athletic, all the more reason to repeat a pre-HS grade to advance the lax career and use it too get into an Ivy or Duke when junior's grades are only meh. None of this I have a problem with. Its just that when the kid plays club or town lax, have the kid play against other kids born the same year as him.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
With the topic of prep vs public being brought up ... reclassification (and PG year) helps preps in a major way. It is stupid for national rankings hypesters to even include a school like Deerfield or Brunswick in same category as Cold Spring. Public schools cannot openly recruit 19 year olds to come play for free for a year. And don't get me started on including IMG Academy in the mix. Those "top" prep schools just want to brag about national rankings with their incredibly old and recruited rosters. They know damn well they are an unfair advantage and they love it.

In Westchester and Fairfield, the holdback fever has taken over the youth level because these ultra-rich kids know they are headed to preps where being older than others isn't just accepted, it is encouraged or even forced. It is the "get ahead by any means necessary" approach their parents embrace.

Can you imagine pulling your kid out of one of the best public schools in the country, paying $35,000 to have your kid repeat 6th grade, then relying on a Brunswick varsity spot where the pot at the end of the rainbow is admission to Duke? That is what these types call a plan, not a dream.


I have no problem with an uber rich Westchester/Fairfield kid repeating a grade. Many of these families decide at birth that the kid will be going to Brunswick or a similar school. Lax players or not, many of these kids are 16 or so as Freshman (especially by the end of the year). So its reasonable (maybe) that they don't want their kid to be the odd 14 year old. And if the kid proves to be athletic, all the more reason to repeat a pre-HS grade to advance the lax career and use it too get into an Ivy or Duke when junior's grades are only meh. None of this I have a problem with. Its just that when the kid plays club or town lax, have the kid play against other kids born the same year as him.


What a sane and rational comment. Holdback all you want, but you'll always be playing kids your own age. Who could have a problem with that? Unfortunately, many apparently...

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year.
Safety - not valid argument. Lacrosse is a very small sport, rural rec areas never sustained, and still can't sustain, single year age groups, always been average 1-1/2 year spreads at youth level. There is no precedent for a safety outcry.
Practicality - HS will always be by grad year, clubs don't want to rebuild or major shake from 8th to 9th, and they control the market. Clubs build 6th to 8th, represents product going into high school, and clubs market on success.
Fairness - product selling at record levels, again what is sell? Best case on a compromise would be to lean on kind hearts to go age-based from 1st to 5th grade, then let the more business-minded approach take over with grade-based in middle school.
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.



Thanks captain obvious! Hence the push by many to get lax to go age-based!


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year. If a minority number of your customers hate your product, but stop in every day to buy it anyway, is there precedent for change? You may need a competitor to offer a better product, or you need impede the growth of the current product. Buying it and complaining about it, is really just buying it...

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year.
Safety - not valid argument. Lacrosse is a very small sport, rural rec areas never sustained, and still can't sustain, single year age groups, always been average 1-1/2 year spreads at youth level. There is no precedent for a safety outcry.
Practicality - HS will always be by grad year, clubs don't want to rebuild or major shake from 8th to 9th, and they control the market. Clubs build 6th to 8th, represents product going into high school, and clubs market on success.
Fairness - product selling at record levels, again what is sell? Best case on a compromise would be to lean on kind hearts to go age-based from 1st to 5th grade, then let the more business-minded approach take over with grade-based in middle school.
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.



Thanks captain obvious! Hence the push by many to get lax to go age-based!


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year. If a minority number of your customers hate your product, but stop in every day to buy it anyway, is there precedent for change? You may need a competitor to offer a better product, or you need impede the growth of the current product. Buying it and complaining about it, is really just buying it...


I can guarantee that there will need to be only one catastrophic safety incident that occurs between mismatched aged boys in a grade-based situation before the whole sport is forced by the insurance industry to go age-based. The only question is whether to do it proactively before that happens or wait for the incident to occur, which it will.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year.
Safety - not valid argument. Lacrosse is a very small sport, rural rec areas never sustained, and still can't sustain, single year age groups, always been average 1-1/2 year spreads at youth level. There is no precedent for a safety outcry.
Practicality - HS will always be by grad year, clubs don't want to rebuild or major shake from 8th to 9th, and they control the market. Clubs build 6th to 8th, represents product going into high school, and clubs market on success.
Fairness - product selling at record levels, again what is sell? Best case on a compromise would be to lean on kind hearts to go age-based from 1st to 5th grade, then let the more business-minded approach take over with grade-based in middle school.
Originally Posted by Anonymous
[quote=Anonymous]Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.



Thanks captain obvious! Hence the push by many to get lax to go age-based!


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year. If a minority number of your customers hate your product, but stop in every day to buy it anyway, is there precedent for change? You may need a competitor to offer a better product, or you need impede the growth of the current product. Buying it and complaining about it, is really just buying it...


I can guarantee that there will need to be only one catastrophic safety incident that occurs between mismatched aged boys in a grade-based situation before the whole sport is forced by the insurance industry to go age-based. The only question is whether to do it proactively before that happens or wait for the incident to occur, which it will.[/quote

Crickets. So the last 60 years was this one big huge unnecessary risk? That's what skill brackets are for, not birthday candles.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year.
Safety - not valid argument. Lacrosse is a very small sport, rural rec areas never sustained, and still can't sustain, single year age groups, always been average 1-1/2 year spreads at youth level. There is no precedent for a safety outcry.
Practicality - HS will always be by grad year, clubs don't want to rebuild or major shake from 8th to 9th, and they control the market. Clubs build 6th to 8th, represents product going into high school, and clubs market on success.
Fairness - product selling at record levels, again what is sell? Best case on a compromise would be to lean on kind hearts to go age-based from 1st to 5th grade, then let the more business-minded approach take over with grade-based in middle school.
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.



Thanks captain obvious! Hence the push by many to get lax to go age-based!


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year. If a minority number of your customers hate your product, but stop in every day to buy it anyway, is there precedent for change? You may need a competitor to offer a better product, or you need impede the growth of the current product. Buying it and complaining about it, is really just buying it...


I can guarantee that there will need to be only one catastrophic safety incident that occurs between mismatched aged boys in a grade-based situation before the whole sport is forced by the insurance industry to go age-based. The only question is whether to do it proactively before that happens or wait for the incident to occur, which it will.


What your personal line? With the injuries in other sports out there, ha..

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year.
Safety - not valid argument. Lacrosse is a very small sport, rural rec areas never sustained, and still can't sustain, single year age groups, always been average 1-1/2 year spreads at youth level. There is no precedent for a safety outcry.
Practicality - HS will always be by grad year, clubs don't want to rebuild or major shake from 8th to 9th, and they control the market. Clubs build 6th to 8th, represents product going into high school, and clubs market on success.
Fairness - product selling at record levels, again what is sell? Best case on a compromise would be to lean on kind hearts to go age-based from 1st to 5th grade, then let the more business-minded approach take over with grade-based in middle school.
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.



Thanks captain obvious! Hence the push by many to get lax to go age-based!


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year. If a minority number of your customers hate your product, but stop in every day to buy it anyway, is there precedent for change? You may need a competitor to offer a better product, or you need impede the growth of the current product. Buying it and complaining about it, is really just buying it...


I can guarantee that there will need to be only one catastrophic safety incident that occurs between mismatched aged boys in a grade-based situation before the whole sport is forced by the insurance industry to go age-based. The only question is whether to do it proactively before that happens or wait for the incident to occur, which it will.


That's why they have waivers. Also when is the last time you saw a high speed devastating hit in a 4th, 5th 6th 7th 8th grade game? Varsity, sure, otherwise no.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
My son is an on age 2020, born in 2002. He is a big boy 6' and 200 lbs. he has always been big and when he was younger teams would complain that he was a "hold back" which he isn't. My question for "hold back" parents is this. Do you feel good about your kid looking like a stud, when he is beating up on kids who are 1-2 years younger? I don't even like when my on age, big kid plays against boys that are smaller than him. I can't even imagine what he would look like if we held him back, but again, I would be embarrassed because he would be beating up younger kids. Am I missing something? Seriously, that must by like an "A" team playing in a "B" division and feeling good about how awesome they look. What is the point?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
My son is an on age 2020, born in 2002. He is a big boy 6' and 200 lbs. he has always been big and when he was younger teams would complain that he was a "hold back" which he isn't. My question for "hold back" parents is this. Do you feel good about your kid looking like a stud, when he is beating up on kids who are 1-2 years younger? I don't even like when my on age, big kid plays against boys that are smaller than him. I can't even imagine what he would look like if we held him back, but again, I would be embarrassed because he would be beating up younger kids. Am I missing something? Seriously, that must by like an "A" team playing in a "B" division and feeling good about how awesome they look. What is the point?


The point is a carefully calculated cheating loser move. My son is an on age smaller 2020. Love when he smokes the holdback sand they throw tantrums on the sidelines. Priceless!

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
My son is an on age 2020, born in 2002. He is a big boy 6' and 200 lbs. he has always been big and when he was younger teams would complain that he was a "hold back" which he isn't. My question for "hold back" parents is this. Do you feel good about your kid looking like a stud, when he is beating up on kids who are 1-2 years younger? I don't even like when my on age, big kid plays against boys that are smaller than him. I can't even imagine what he would look like if we held him back, but again, I would be embarrassed because he would be beating up younger kids. Am I missing something? Seriously, that must by like an "A" team playing in a "B" division and feeling good about how awesome they look. What is the point?


No, but to assume every private school 1st grade, 2nd grade, etc parent is going to add plus 1 when they register under the current rules, if they have a prefirst curriculum, because there could be now or in the future a size disparity is ridiculous, and certainly not worthy of being personally criticized. Can 6 and 7, 7 and 8 year olds all of a sudden not play and learn lacrosse together?! If the registration system changes, cool. If your kid develops, grows, whatever, and at 8,9,10 you want to move him up, cool. Your specific example is not typical. Sure, if there are a handful of superior older 6,7th graders running the tables in middle school, play them up if you have any good sense as a parent or coach, but once high school hits, business is business, no such thing as fair, there is legal or not legal. If they can't play, it won't matter how old they are at that point.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year.
Safety - not valid argument. Lacrosse is a very small sport, rural rec areas never sustained, and still can't sustain, single year age groups, always been average 1-1/2 year spreads at youth level. There is no precedent for a safety outcry.
Practicality - HS will always be by grad year, clubs don't want to rebuild or major shake from 8th to 9th, and they control the market. Clubs build 6th to 8th, represents product going into high school, and clubs market on success.
Fairness - product selling at record levels, again what is sell? Best case on a compromise would be to lean on kind hearts to go age-based from 1st to 5th grade, then let the more business-minded approach take over with grade-based in middle school.
Originally Posted by Anonymous
[quote=Anonymous]Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.



Thanks captain obvious! Hence the push by many to get lax to go age-based!


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year. If a minority number of your customers hate your product, but stop in every day to buy it anyway, is there precedent for change? You may need a competitor to offer a better product, or you need impede the growth of the current product. Buying it and complaining about it, is really just buying it...


I can guarantee that there will need to be only one catastrophic safety incident that occurs between mismatched aged boys in a grade-based situation before the whole sport is forced by the insurance industry to go age-based. The only question is whether to do it proactively before that happens or wait for the incident to occur, which it will.[/quote

Crickets. So the last 60 years was this one big huge unnecessary risk? That's what skill brackets are for, not birthday candles.


You quote recent growth numbers and then subsequently treat the current situation as the 60-year status quo?! You're not really good at this logic and debate thing, are you??

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
This holdback thing was completely thrown in my face this summer.

explaining how it works went something like this.

Them: which boy is yours?

Me: ###

Them: Wow he is thick

Me: "Johnnie" is a big boy for his age, his birthday is September. By other state schools definition, he could be a year younger in school and play a year lower in sports. On LI it is Dec 1 or Jan 1st or something in between.

Them: Our (Declan) son is born in June, in our district (Cali) he would have been one of the youngest in his grade so we decided to wait and have him be the oldest. Wasnt fair to him to be the youngest. and he has a slight frame.

Me: I guess someone has to be the youngest.

Them: your LI teams are good. are they all aged like your son's team.

ME: many are,

Them: we were at the WSYL the past few years. someone said they werent real teams

Me: "John" was asked to play in the WSYL, but it was for a new team they were making in his organization. they would play 4/5 games then go to Denver.

Them: thats not fair, it isnt his team.

Me: yeah, how about that. If any LI team would go with the summer team they would be younger so they create new teams. Many kids play on 1 or 2 teams anyway. These teams fit the age boundaries. they play 4/5 games and becomes a team..

Them: How is that fair?

Me: I dont mean to be rude but you say fair, to me your boy is playing down?

Them: well he is the youngest on the team

Me: wait he is playing down and the youngest on the team, and you are complaining about what is fair. admittingly I regret it, but I said no to my son playing down. So please I no longer get what is fair or not. the WSYL maybe a farce with the age cutoffs, since it hasnt been consistent since inception. but age is age.

Them: I guess you are right, how old are the boys on the field now?

ME: 15/16

Them: oh, but what year are they?

ME: 2019

Them: I still dont get why you have them play 2019 they should be 2020? They are playing against older kids.

ME: well that is how we do it? thanks for the conversation have a great day good luck


Qtr changes and gave me an excuse to exit stage right....

My outtake why the [lacrosse] doesnt the government have a set date for school (across the country). People dont get it . When did cheating become the norm. When kids across the country go to college it is a bell curve of ages, why not have a consistent age of when you should go in. Heck, not just in sport but academics also. Hey Im not saying take away a PG or holdback, you want to PG or hold back okay go ahead, but let everyone be on the same page of what is going on. You want to gain an advantage because you/He/She couldnt do it the right way. Now you need to find that back door.


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year.
Safety - not valid argument. Lacrosse is a very small sport, rural rec areas never sustained, and still can't sustain, single year age groups, always been average 1-1/2 year spreads at youth level. There is no precedent for a safety outcry.
Practicality - HS will always be by grad year, clubs don't want to rebuild or major shake from 8th to 9th, and they control the market. Clubs build 6th to 8th, represents product going into high school, and clubs market on success.
Fairness - product selling at record levels, again what is sell? Best case on a compromise would be to lean on kind hearts to go age-based from 1st to 5th grade, then let the more business-minded approach take over with grade-based in middle school.
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.



Thanks captain obvious! Hence the push by many to get lax to go age-based!


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year. If a minority number of your customers hate your product, but stop in every day to buy it anyway, is there precedent for change? You may need a competitor to offer a better product, or you need impede the growth of the current product. Buying it and complaining about it, is really just buying it...


I can guarantee that there will need to be only one catastrophic safety incident that occurs between mismatched aged boys in a grade-based situation before the whole sport is forced by the insurance industry to go age-based. The only question is whether to do it proactively before that happens or wait for the incident to occur, which it will.


That's why they have waivers. Also when is the last time you saw a high speed devastating hit in a 4th, 5th 6th 7th 8th grade game? Varsity, sure, otherwise no.


Waivers are a scare tactic - they don't stand up a lot of the time. You must not be watching the 7th and 8th grade divisions much - I've seen some big hits in those games.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous


My outtake why the [lacrosse] doesnt the government have a set date for school (across the country).



We have something in this country (or used to) called "federalism" - education is a state right . . . strangely, it's kind of almost making a comeback now . . .

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year.
Safety - not valid argument. Lacrosse is a very small sport, rural rec areas never sustained, and still can't sustain, single year age groups, always been average 1-1/2 year spreads at youth level. There is no precedent for a safety outcry.
Practicality - HS will always be by grad year, clubs don't want to rebuild or major shake from 8th to 9th, and they control the market. Clubs build 6th to 8th, represents product going into high school, and clubs market on success.
Fairness - product selling at record levels, again what is sell? Best case on a compromise would be to lean on kind hearts to go age-based from 1st to 5th grade, then let the more business-minded approach take over with grade-based in middle school.
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.



Thanks captain obvious! Hence the push by many to get lax to go age-based!


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year. If a minority number of your customers hate your product, but stop in every day to buy it anyway, is there precedent for change? You may need a competitor to offer a better product, or you need impede the growth of the current product. Buying it and complaining about it, is really just buying it...


I can guarantee that there will need to be only one catastrophic safety incident that occurs between mismatched aged boys in a grade-based situation before the whole sport is forced by the insurance industry to go age-based. The only question is whether to do it proactively before that happens or wait for the incident to occur, which it will.


What your personal line? With the injuries in other sports out there, ha..


Just because injuries happen in other sports doesn't mean that you do not do everything possible to prevent them and/or limit/mitigate their severity - you only need one suit brought by one party where they prevail to change the tune, and failure to provide "safe playing conditions", IE, mismatched ages, would be the low hanging fruit for an attorney to go after. ALL other contact sports at the youth level are age-based, and for good reason that fact would be used as evidence in such a suit. Lastly, there is NO legitimate argument that lacrosse should not be age-based.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year.
Safety - not valid argument. Lacrosse is a very small sport, rural rec areas never sustained, and still can't sustain, single year age groups, always been average 1-1/2 year spreads at youth level. There is no precedent for a safety outcry.
Practicality - HS will always be by grad year, clubs don't want to rebuild or major shake from 8th to 9th, and they control the market. Clubs build 6th to 8th, represents product going into high school, and clubs market on success.
Fairness - product selling at record levels, again what is sell? Best case on a compromise would be to lean on kind hearts to go age-based from 1st to 5th grade, then let the more business-minded approach take over with grade-based in middle school.
Originally Posted by Anonymous
[quote=Anonymous]Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.



Thanks captain obvious! Hence the push by many to get lax to go age-based!


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year. If a minority number of your customers hate your product, but stop in every day to buy it anyway, is there precedent for change? You may need a competitor to offer a better product, or you need impede the growth of the current product. Buying it and complaining about it, is really just buying it...


I can guarantee that there will need to be only one catastrophic safety incident that occurs between mismatched aged boys in a grade-based situation before the whole sport is forced by the insurance industry to go age-based. The only question is whether to do it proactively before that happens or wait for the incident to occur, which it will.[/quote

Crickets. So the last 60 years was this one big huge unnecessary risk? That's what skill brackets are for, not birthday candles.


You quote recent growth numbers and then subsequently treat the current situation as the 60-year status quo?! You're not really good at this logic and debate thing, are you??


I don't see anything about growth in the 60 year comment. You realize there are multiple people on here, and it's not just you and some other ding dong arguing, correct?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
This holdback thing was completely thrown in my face this summer.

explaining how it works went something like this.

Them: which boy is yours?

Me: ###

Them: Wow he is thick

Me: "Johnnie" is a big boy for his age, his birthday is September. By other state schools definition, he could be a year younger in school and play a year lower in sports. On LI it is Dec 1 or Jan 1st or something in between.

Them: Our (Declan) son is born in June, in our district (Cali) he would have been one of the youngest in his grade so we decided to wait and have him be the oldest. Wasnt fair to him to be the youngest. and he has a slight frame.

Me: I guess someone has to be the youngest.

Them: your LI teams are good. are they all aged like your son's team.

ME: many are,

Them: we were at the WSYL the past few years. someone said they werent real teams

Me: "John" was asked to play in the WSYL, but it was for a new team they were making in his organization. they would play 4/5 games then go to Denver.

Them: thats not fair, it isnt his team.

Me: yeah, how about that. If any LI team would go with the summer team they would be younger so they create new teams. Many kids play on 1 or 2 teams anyway. These teams fit the age boundaries. they play 4/5 games and becomes a team..

Them: How is that fair?

Me: I dont mean to be rude but you say fair, to me your boy is playing down?

Them: well he is the youngest on the team

Me: wait he is playing down and the youngest on the team, and you are complaining about what is fair. admittingly I regret it, but I said no to my son playing down. So please I no longer get what is fair or not. the WSYL maybe a farce with the age cutoffs, since it hasnt been consistent since inception. but age is age.

Them: I guess you are right, how old are the boys on the field now?

ME: 15/16

Them: oh, but what year are they?

ME: 2019

Them: I still dont get why you have them play 2019 they should be 2020? They are playing against older kids.

ME: well that is how we do it? thanks for the conversation have a great day good luck


Qtr changes and gave me an excuse to exit stage right....

My outtake why the [lacrosse] doesnt the government have a set date for school (across the country). People dont get it . When did cheating become the norm. When kids across the country go to college it is a bell curve of ages, why not have a consistent age of when you should go in. Heck, not just in sport but academics also. Hey Im not saying take away a PG or holdback, you want to PG or hold back okay go ahead, but let everyone be on the same page of what is going on. You want to gain an advantage because you/He/She couldnt do it the right way. Now you need to find that back door.



You should call your script "Fart Noise".

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
This holdback thing was completely thrown in my face this summer.

explaining how it works went something like this.

Them: which boy is yours?

Me: ###

Them: Wow he is thick

Me: "Johnnie" is a big boy for his age, his birthday is September. By other state schools definition, he could be a year younger in school and play a year lower in sports. On LI it is Dec 1 or Jan 1st or something in between.

Them: Our (Declan) son is born in June, in our district (Cali) he would have been one of the youngest in his grade so we decided to wait and have him be the oldest. Wasnt fair to him to be the youngest. and he has a slight frame.

Me: I guess someone has to be the youngest.

Them: your LI teams are good. are they all aged like your son's team.

ME: many are,

Them: we were at the WSYL the past few years. someone said they werent real teams

Me: "John" was asked to play in the WSYL, but it was for a new team they were making in his organization. they would play 4/5 games then go to Denver.

Them: thats not fair, it isnt his team.

Me: yeah, how about that. If any LI team would go with the summer team they would be younger so they create new teams. Many kids play on 1 or 2 teams anyway. These teams fit the age boundaries. they play 4/5 games and becomes a team..

Them: How is that fair?

Me: I dont mean to be rude but you say fair, to me your boy is playing down?

Them: well he is the youngest on the team

Me: wait he is playing down and the youngest on the team, and you are complaining about what is fair. admittingly I regret it, but I said no to my son playing down. So please I no longer get what is fair or not. the WSYL maybe a farce with the age cutoffs, since it hasnt been consistent since inception. but age is age.

Them: I guess you are right, how old are the boys on the field now?

ME: 15/16

Them: oh, but what year are they?

ME: 2019

Them: I still dont get why you have them play 2019 they should be 2020? They are playing against older kids.

ME: well that is how we do it? thanks for the conversation have a great day good luck


Qtr changes and gave me an excuse to exit stage right....

My outtake why the [lacrosse] doesnt the government have a set date for school (across the country). People dont get it . When did cheating become the norm. When kids across the country go to college it is a bell curve of ages, why not have a consistent age of when you should go in. Heck, not just in sport but academics also. Hey Im not saying take away a PG or holdback, you want to PG or hold back okay go ahead, but let everyone be on the same page of what is going on. You want to gain an advantage because you/He/She couldnt do it the right way. Now you need to find that back door.


Because this isn't the USSR. Most schools do set a maximum for athletic participation, and it is typically the equivalent of doing one extra year. Makes sense, since almost the entire private school industry has evolved. Did you seriously mean to infer that every American would need to finish HS (as in mandated) at the same birth year age? All of your nonsensical drivel aside, come on, you realize when you start talking to someone on the sideline, they walk away within like 20 seconds, right?

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Tell me ONE instance where a waiver did not stand up? Just ONE! And yes I have watched 4-8 lacrosse and what you may think is a "big" hit is not. It's a three step pop. Guessing your kid does not play football or soccer or hockey. See the same hits. The only scare tactic is your statement that someone is going to get severely hurt due to some imaginary massive size difference. Don't see it at the HS level and my guy plays Nassau A. No one cares there. Sorry, you are wrong on this.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year.
Safety - not valid argument. Lacrosse is a very small sport, rural rec areas never sustained, and still can't sustain, single year age groups, always been average 1-1/2 year spreads at youth level. There is no precedent for a safety outcry.
Practicality - HS will always be by grad year, clubs don't want to rebuild or major shake from 8th to 9th, and they control the market. Clubs build 6th to 8th, represents product going into high school, and clubs market on success.
Fairness - product selling at record levels, again what is sell? Best case on a compromise would be to lean on kind hearts to go age-based from 1st to 5th grade, then let the more business-minded approach take over with grade-based in middle school.
Originally Posted by Anonymous
[quote=Anonymous]Breaking News, families of public and private school kids across the country pay lots of money to voluntarily play in a youth private club sports league that is grade-based, so they sign up appropriately by grade. This Just In - More Exclusive Breaking News, if the league changes to age-based, kids will appropriately sign up by age.



Thanks captain obvious! Hence the push by many to get lax to go age-based!


All of the tryouts are grade-based again. Youth participation doubled last year, largest single-year spike in history of sport. What is the sell to change? Club is a private business, so has to be more than some complaining from parents that already paid for the year, and continue to do so every year. If a minority number of your customers hate your product, but stop in every day to buy it anyway, is there precedent for change? You may need a competitor to offer a better product, or you need impede the growth of the current product. Buying it and complaining about it, is really just buying it...


I can guarantee that there will need to be only one catastrophic safety incident that occurs between mismatched aged boys in a grade-based situation before the whole sport is forced by the insurance industry to go age-based. The only question is whether to do it proactively before that happens or wait for the incident to occur, which it will.[/quote

Crickets. So the last 60 years was this one big huge unnecessary risk? That's what skill brackets are for, not birthday candles.


You quote recent growth numbers and then subsequently treat the current situation as the 60-year status quo?! You're not really good at this logic and debate thing, are you??


I don't see anything about growth in the 60 year comment. You realize there are multiple people on here, and it's not just you and some other ding dong arguing, correct?


OK ding dong . . .

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
This holdback thing was completely thrown in my face this summer.

explaining how it works went something like this.

Them: which boy is yours?

Me: ###

Them: Wow he is thick

Me: "Johnnie" is a big boy for his age, his birthday is September. By other state schools definition, he could be a year younger in school and play a year lower in sports. On LI it is Dec 1 or Jan 1st or something in between.

Them: Our (Declan) son is born in June, in our district (Cali) he would have been one of the youngest in his grade so we decided to wait and have him be the oldest. Wasnt fair to him to be the youngest. and he has a slight frame.

Me: I guess someone has to be the youngest.

Them: your LI teams are good. are they all aged like your son's team.

ME: many are,

Them: we were at the WSYL the past few years. someone said they werent real teams

Me: "John" was asked to play in the WSYL, but it was for a new team they were making in his organization. they would play 4/5 games then go to Denver.

Them: thats not fair, it isnt his team.

Me: yeah, how about that. If any LI team would go with the summer team they would be younger so they create new teams. Many kids play on 1 or 2 teams anyway. These teams fit the age boundaries. they play 4/5 games and becomes a team..

Them: How is that fair?

Me: I dont mean to be rude but you say fair, to me your boy is playing down?

Them: well he is the youngest on the team

Me: wait he is playing down and the youngest on the team, and you are complaining about what is fair. admittingly I regret it, but I said no to my son playing down. So please I no longer get what is fair or not. the WSYL maybe a farce with the age cutoffs, since it hasnt been consistent since inception. but age is age.

Them: I guess you are right, how old are the boys on the field now?

ME: 15/16

Them: oh, but what year are they?

ME: 2019

Them: I still dont get why you have them play 2019 they should be 2020? They are playing against older kids.

ME: well that is how we do it? thanks for the conversation have a great day good luck


Qtr changes and gave me an excuse to exit stage right....

My outtake why the [lacrosse] doesnt the government have a set date for school (across the country). People dont get it . When did cheating become the norm. When kids across the country go to college it is a bell curve of ages, why not have a consistent age of when you should go in. Heck, not just in sport but academics also. Hey Im not saying take away a PG or holdback, you want to PG or hold back okay go ahead, but let everyone be on the same page of what is going on. You want to gain an advantage because you/He/She couldnt do it the right way. Now you need to find that back door.


Because this isn't the USSR. Most schools do set a maximum for athletic participation, and it is typically the equivalent of doing one extra year. Makes sense, since almost the entire private school industry has evolved. Did you seriously mean to infer that every American would need to finish HS (as in mandated) at the same birth year age? All of your nonsensical drivel aside, come on, you realize when you start talking to someone on the sideline, they walk away within like 20 seconds, right?



Once the government does that, then they can make the biotech industry create a drug that makes every boy reach puberty at the same time. Then we can have leagues by height and weight, and while we are at it let's time them in the 40yrd dash and make sure there are kids that are not too fast. and maybe we can compensate the dumb ones that don't know what they are doing by only allowing a defender to be so close. Make sure the bell curve is as steep as possible.....

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Beat me too it. Even though DC has been trying more and more to control what is done in the states, you want Florida, Mississippi, and the rest of the country having a say in how to run our schools in NY?


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
To the fool that wrote, “there is no precedent for a safety outcry” and then again wrote, “If a minority number of your customers hate your product, but stop in everyday to buy it anyway, is there precedent for change”… I would suggest you look up the meaning of the word precedent and then go and find me another contact sport (at the youth level) that doesn’t have some limitation or control for size and/or age. Do you think that was always the case?

Here are a few tips for you moving forward - a) don’t use words you don’t really understand the meaning of and b) don’t cite examples of things that actually argue against your point.

Business is business and this whole thing is real $ for the people that run it. So, no - it won’t change overnight. That doesn’t mean that consumers of the product (with as much right to their opinion as you have to yours) shouldn’t make the case for why there is a better path forward. Parents of left-back kids exploit a system that is deliberately set up to be exploited. Sorry, but Jr. is just older than his opponents, he is greatly advantaged by that fact and the left-back parents know this is true. Rationalize away!


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
This holdback thing was completely thrown in my face this summer.

explaining how it works went something like this.

Them: which boy is yours?

Me: ###

Them: Wow he is thick

Me: "Johnnie" is a big boy for his age, his birthday is September. By other state schools definition, he could be a year younger in school and play a year lower in sports. On LI it is Dec 1 or Jan 1st or something in between.

Them: Our (Declan) son is born in June, in our district (Cali) he would have been one of the youngest in his grade so we decided to wait and have him be the oldest. Wasnt fair to him to be the youngest. and he has a slight frame.

Me: I guess someone has to be the youngest.

Them: your LI teams are good. are they all aged like your son's team.

ME: many are,

Them: we were at the WSYL the past few years. someone said they werent real teams

Me: "John" was asked to play in the WSYL, but it was for a new team they were making in his organization. they would play 4/5 games then go to Denver.

Them: thats not fair, it isnt his team.

Me: yeah, how about that. If any LI team would go with the summer team they would be younger so they create new teams. Many kids play on 1 or 2 teams anyway. These teams fit the age boundaries. they play 4/5 games and becomes a team..

Them: How is that fair?

Me: I dont mean to be rude but you say fair, to me your boy is playing down?

Them: well he is the youngest on the team

Me: wait he is playing down and the youngest on the team, and you are complaining about what is fair. admittingly I regret it, but I said no to my son playing down. So please I no longer get what is fair or not. the WSYL maybe a farce with the age cutoffs, since it hasnt been consistent since inception. but age is age.

Them: I guess you are right, how old are the boys on the field now?

ME: 15/16

Them: oh, but what year are they?

ME: 2019

Them: I still dont get why you have them play 2019 they should be 2020? They are playing against older kids.

ME: well that is how we do it? thanks for the conversation have a great day good luck


Qtr changes and gave me an excuse to exit stage right....

My outtake why the [lacrosse] doesnt the government have a set date for school (across the country). People dont get it . When did cheating become the norm. When kids across the country go to college it is a bell curve of ages, why not have a consistent age of when you should go in. Heck, not just in sport but academics also. Hey Im not saying take away a PG or holdback, you want to PG or hold back okay go ahead, but let everyone be on the same page of what is going on. You want to gain an advantage because you/He/She couldnt do it the right way. Now you need to find that back door.



If the gubment - listened to folks like you and instituted strict guidelines on what age a kid must be to be in that particular grade in the name of "fairness" for a particular sport, they would get pushback and opposition never before seen. Look beyond your small world of lacrosse and maybe you might understand how people get away with it. Have you ever noticed how old some of those boys are that are being drafted by the NFL? Juniors in some of those major SEC programs who are 22 or 23 at the draft, that's not on age. But, a lot of times, those are not intentional holdbacks. And then you want the gubment to institute something that would run counter to the NCLB's replacement the ESSA. Please pass that on to your local representative or Senator and see how far that gets along.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Bottom line Holdback parents and non holdback parents will never agree on this so why continue arguing. My son is a 2023 born in April plays on a top program and is very athletic but he is small I would love to have held him back seeing what goes on but when he was 5 I wasn't thinking about any of this, such is life. Good luck arguing back and fourth at least you give people some laughs.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Tell me ONE instance where a waiver did not stand up? Just ONE! And yes I have watched 4-8 lacrosse and what you may think is a "big" hit is not. It's a three step pop. Guessing your kid does not play football or soccer or hockey. See the same hits. The only scare tactic is your statement that someone is going to get severely hurt due to some imaginary massive size difference. Don't see it at the HS level and my guy plays Nassau A. No one cares there. Sorry, you are wrong on this.


Dude - I played college football and all my sons play football - I know better than you will ever know what a big hit is like. Plus, you are missing the point on this altogether: the case where this problem will likely come to a tipping point will be the vast difference in size between two players, where the hit on otherwise similar sized players might not have been as dangerous, but because of the laws of physics and with respect to mass, along with other 'perfect storm' conditions, the results will be catastrophic. The bigger the sport gets, the more participants that play, the more likely an unfortunate and catastrophic incident will occur between mismatched aged players in a grade-based system. You mention three other sports (one not even a contact sport!) - funny how all three of those sports all moved to aged-based governance. And, yes I've seen big hits in lax games, although most result in man down situations these days, but they happen nonetheless.

Lastly, there are states where a parent signing of a waiver on behalf of their children and the courts generally hold that such a waiver DOES NOT preclude the injured child from bringing suit against a party for negligence - two of those states are New Jersey and Pennsylvania!

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
To the fool that wrote, “there is no precedent for a safety outcry” and then again wrote, “If a minority number of your customers hate your product, but stop in everyday to buy it anyway, is there precedent for change”… I would suggest you look up the meaning of the word precedent and then go and find me another contact sport (at the youth level) that doesn’t have some limitation or control for size and/or age. Do you think that was always the case?

Here are a few tips for you moving forward - a) don’t use words you don’t really understand the meaning of and b) don’t cite examples of things that actually argue against your point.

Business is business and this whole thing is real $ for the people that run it. So, no - it won’t change overnight. That doesn’t mean that consumers of the product (with as much right to their opinion as you have to yours) shouldn’t make the case for why there is a better path forward. Parents of left-back kids exploit a system that is deliberately set up to be exploited. Sorry, but Jr. is just older than his opponents, he is greatly advantaged by that fact and the left-back parents know this is true. Rationalize away!



Agreed. Moreover, many businesses, and even entire industries, have rested on their laurels and said "why make changes, we are successful", only to see the world change and leave them behind. As said above, this thing is real $ for those that run it, and if they are not concerned with growth, they should be. Moving to an aged based system, in conjunction with a more delineated and uniform skill level division (AAA, AA, A & B), will, in my opinion, engender more growth than they are already experienced, and more importantly, more sustained growth. For those who site numbers showing that lacrosse is growing at a substantial rate as it, keep in mind that this growth is mostly due to the fact that lacrosse is only starting to move away from its very small niche areas of LI and MD. Its a great sport and its being established in many areas of the country where it was never played before. This type of "0-60" growth for any industry is very easy. But there is still room for tons of growth, especially with the summer/fall teams, and in order to maximize this growth, it needs to move to age-based, and it needs to move to a more stratified skill/athletism structure, which will be easier to do the more it grows. This will ensure that kids play against kids who are similar in both age and skill. When this happens, kids and parents will be happier, more likely to keep coming back, and most importantly, more families will want to participate in travel lacrosse. I have seen many kids put on teams where they don't belong, than play against kids who are much older and much more skilled. These kids don't come back. Their money is just a green as everyone else's. If these clubs fostered a true B division (not the so-called one where if the team is not one of the top 10 in the country it is B) where kids played on age, these kids would thrive. My kids would likely be AA on age and the experience would be much better.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
To the fool that wrote, “there is no precedent for a safety outcry” and then again wrote, “If a minority number of your customers hate your product, but stop in everyday to buy it anyway, is there precedent for change”… I would suggest you look up the meaning of the word precedent and then go and find me another contact sport (at the youth level) that doesn’t have some limitation or control for size and/or age. Do you think that was always the case?

Here are a few tips for you moving forward - a) don’t use words you don’t really understand the meaning of and b) don’t cite examples of things that actually argue against your point.

Business is business and this whole thing is real $ for the people that run it. So, no - it won’t change overnight. That doesn’t mean that consumers of the product (with as much right to their opinion as you have to yours) shouldn’t make the case for why there is a better path forward. Parents of left-back kids exploit a system that is deliberately set up to be exploited. Sorry, but Jr. is just older than his opponents, he is greatly advantaged by that fact and the left-back parents know this is true. Rationalize away!


Sorry, in your over-thinking and under-explaining, you forgot to cite the precedent. Oh, and it would be, "for which you don't understand the meaning", or some other correctly-written variation. You wouldn't finish that thought with a preposition.
You would make a better case if you would just concede that the grade-based system has certain flaws, rather than essentially accusing the majority of private school parents with some type of mass exploitation. Seriously, most elementary school parents, whether new to the game or not, are not putting much thought into the system at time of registration; if their kid is in 3rd grade, they are probably compelled to check off 3rd grade! Sure, there are those parents of older middle school kids that are smart enough to realize they could play their kid up, probably to his benefit developmentally, but those folks aren't the baseline for all kids that are in a different school curriculum. Just comes off as complaining when you start criticizing a large share of the market base, rather than the leagues that control the rules. At the end of the day, the people that you criticize would sign up legally under any rule without much fanfare, but folks like you would just find another reason to whine and complain, so who gives a crap anyway. Keep crying, but don't forget to send that check in, please.


Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Tell me ONE instance where a waiver did not stand up? Just ONE! And yes I have watched 4-8 lacrosse and what you may think is a "big" hit is not. It's a three step pop. Guessing your kid does not play football or soccer or hockey. See the same hits. The only scare tactic is your statement that someone is going to get severely hurt due to some imaginary massive size difference. Don't see it at the HS level and my guy plays Nassau A. No one cares there. Sorry, you are wrong on this.


Dude - I played college football and all my sons play football - I know better than you will ever know what a big hit is like. Plus, you are missing the point on this altogether: the case where this problem will likely come to a tipping point will be the vast difference in size between two players, where the hit on otherwise similar sized players might not have been as dangerous, but because of the laws of physics and with respect to mass, along with other 'perfect storm' conditions, the results will be catastrophic. The bigger the sport gets, the more participants that play, the more likely an unfortunate and catastrophic incident will occur between mismatched aged players in a grade-based system. You mention three other sports (one not even a contact sport!) - funny how all three of those sports all moved to aged-based governance. And, yes I've seen big hits in lax games, although most result in man down situations these days, but they happen nonetheless.

Lastly, there are states where a parent signing of a waiver on behalf of their children and the courts generally hold that such a waiver DOES NOT preclude the injured child from bringing suit against a party for negligence - two of those states are New Jersey and Pennsylvania!


Please keep talking, please. Tell us one of your college football stories, but tie in some stuff from one of your science classes. Please don't stop responding on here, seriously, we need you.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Tell me ONE instance where a waiver did not stand up? Just ONE! And yes I have watched 4-8 lacrosse and what you may think is a "big" hit is not. It's a three step pop. Guessing your kid does not play football or soccer or hockey. See the same hits. The only scare tactic is your statement that someone is going to get severely hurt due to some imaginary massive size difference. Don't see it at the HS level and my guy plays Nassau A. No one cares there. Sorry, you are wrong on this.


Dude - I played college football and all my sons play football - I know better than you will ever know what a big hit is like. Plus, you are missing the point on this altogether: the case where this problem will likely come to a tipping point will be the vast difference in size between two players, where the hit on otherwise similar sized players might not have been as dangerous, but because of the laws of physics and with respect to mass, along with other 'perfect storm' conditions, the results will be catastrophic. The bigger the sport gets, the more participants that play, the more likely an unfortunate and catastrophic incident will occur between mismatched aged players in a grade-based system. You mention three other sports (one not even a contact sport!) - funny how all three of those sports all moved to aged-based governance. And, yes I've seen big hits in lax games, although most result in man down situations these days, but they happen nonetheless.

Lastly, there are states where a parent signing of a waiver on behalf of their children and the courts generally hold that such a waiver DOES NOT preclude the injured child from bringing suit against a party for negligence - two of those states are New Jersey and Pennsylvania!


Please keep talking, please. Tell us one of your college football stories, but tie in some stuff from one of your science classes. Please don't stop responding on here, seriously, we need you.


Way to argue your position - pat yourself on the back for that great retort . . . and then make an ortho appointment for your resulting torn rotator cuff.

Like Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly!
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
The injury thing seems like a stretch in that you are relating it to size and there are many kids the same age that are vastly different in size. I do think that lax teams and tournaments should be age based but purely based on fairness. It is clearly an advantage to hold your kid back from an athletic perspective so essentially you are putting those who do not at a disadvantage .That disadvantage can ultimately impact where your child goes to school etc. Some of you will disagree but not much different from taking steroids out of sports as best as possible.

Like Reply Quote
Page 1 of 26 1 2 3 25 26
Quick Reply

Options
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
CAPTCHA Verification



Link Copied to Clipboard












Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4