Originally Posted by America's Game
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Keep crying, Long Island. Keeo crying.


Not playing age-based sports below the high school years makes no sense. College coaches don't care how old a kid is and I'm sure they promote reclassing/holding back, whatever the eff you want to call it. Fact is, older kids dominate younger kids, it's why 2019 teams beat all the 2020 teams, why 2020 teams beat 2021 teams, etc. It's why most of the best kids on the field are typically the oldest kids. For some reason, Baltimorans/Marylanders seem to think their kids are better and take glory in beating the Crush by using older players. It's unethical and despicable behavior, and the parents should be ashamed. But they aren't and they continue to promote that behavior. I wouldn't call it complaining/crying, we're just calling you out. Go to an age based system and there would be no arguing/debating. This debate doesn't happen at all in girls sports, simply low self esteem dad's trying to get their sons an unfair advantage. Crabs are worst offenders.


Girls lacrosse has been class-based for years. No crying there. I guess their parents aren't wimps.


There is no hitting in girls lacrosse so I think the physicality of the boys game makes for a greater argument as to having the kids play by age of year born not graduation year. I would love to see my son play against himself a full year and a half younger. It would make a world of difference. In the less than a year when puberty kicked in he grew 6 inches in height and put on 15-20lbs.


Man I'd love that too. My son is the youngest on his AA team, and as a true grad year. It would be an incredible sight to see him play his younger self.