Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by The Hop
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
[quote=Anonymous]The argument against age based teams keeps going backwards. To be clear, the exact words from the NPYLL board was that going to grade based teams instead of U-9, U-11, U-13 and U-15 will enable clubs to field more teams.

That is false. Before last year there were numerous clubs that went with AA teams, then A teams and may have also had B teams. The grade based system wasn't some magical exilir that makes it possible to do more teams, since more teams existed anyways. It was sold as a better system to go up by single years. I have never heard an argument for WHY single grade based teams are needed over single year age teams aside from that it makes it easier for college coaches to evaluate players which I have a hard time believing since kids have their D.O.B., school and school year listed in the club tournament programs. And any argument that teams between ages 8-13 need to be grade based for the college recruiting point is pointless and silly. Basically US Lacrosse foreshadowed policy by publishing their best practices, and within ONE WEEK the NPYLL overlords decided to go to grade based teams, and voted it in. It's a hard sell to represent that as a coincidence and something NPYLL was contemplating for some time to solve the "need for more teams" crisis which never existed.

I emailed our club owner. I emailed all of the NPYLL board members, and not one of them ever formally responded to me beyond to state for those who don't like it, maybe club lacrosse is not a good fit for those kids.

There are no valid arguments that what is common in soccer, ice hockey and other larger and more evolved sports than lacrosse do -- which is single age year team flights -- is impossible to apply to lacrosse because college coaches can't read tournament programs and will go on recruiting a kid having no bloody clue what year in school he is. That is stupid. There isn't a valid argument that the "holdbacks" who are indeed college recruits can't hang on with kids their own calendar age. If they can't they would not be recruited. There isn't a valid argument that same kids can't "play down" or reclassify for prep school play, because there isn't a rule against it in the prep leagues. There are valid safety issues with grade based teams given the prolific appetites of parents and also entire club programs (Edge is one example) to play down beginning in the youth levels where the size and maturity deltas between kids is too much to stuff everyone into, which is exactly the problem. It used to be top kids played up, and that is a discretionary choice. Now top kids play down, and that takes away discretion from parents. You can't just run to a single A or B team at these clubs like with the U-11AA, A then B world we used to get along in.

Now again: why the fight to keep club ball grade based over age based? The latter is not disputable in that it is safer, and more forthright equitable to the participants. I would have some respect for Ryan McClernan and the other NPYLL board members who mandated this process to stop hiding behind unanswered emails and other queries and make their standing statement on this issue. It is not going away.


Blah blah blah.


No wonder your child needed to be held back. He had your genes.


The post was simply too long. Probably why the "blah blah blah" was thrown your way. I tend to agree. Sorry


You didn't say when you sent the email, but unless you sent it in 2014 they probably haven't finished reading it yet. Nailed it! Too funny]