Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I tend to think that although there may be some coaches at events for 2021/2020 kid this summer, attendance will be down for sure. Because it just doesnt really matter if they see a kid that plays well this summer. (Because with no contact, unless your kid looks like a stud the summer before their junior year, it won't matter). This is a bitter pill for some to swallow, especially the directors of all of these "exclusive recruiting" events. Their cash cow is coming to an end very quickly.
My suggestion, take the money you would have spent on those events and use it to hire a tutor, get SAT prep halo and make sure you kid is taking as many Honors/AP courses as they can handle. With some of their free time, they can also do some type of community service, so leading into their Junior year they will be a complete package! Heck, with a little hard work they might even get into college on their own!!!
I really don't understand why anyone is upset about this, if a kid is really that great right now (as a 8th or 9th grader) they will still be great as a junior, why all the fuss?


2020 parent here.

Yes, there will be a few less coaches and players at 2020 events this summer but I doubt this will amount to the devastating economic blow to showcase organizers that everyone here hopes it will be.

Kids don't suddenly have oodles of free time just because they are skipping a showcase or two. If a kid is not already doing the other things that you mention I doubt that will start now because one weekend has freed up.

Why are people upset? Well for every 2020 kid who has committed there is another who is talking to coaches, doing vists and probably close to making a decision soon. With 80ish 2020s already committed, telling the rest of them that the door is now closed seems like a knee-jerk response and shows that this is not about the kids at all. The NCAA is punishing the kids who have not committed because of the ones who have.




Agreed, this should have started with the 2021 grad year. Lacrosse loves to make arbitrary rules, change rules, not make the rules they really should. A joke! If there was one good thing that should have been done for the sport, it should have been age enforcement. Who cares when a kid commits!



While I fully agree that moving to an age-based governance is needed, the two issues are separate in that 'governance' is accomplished by different entities. The NCAA has no authority outside of membership institutions, which are all post-secondary. US lacrosse is where the age-based governance needs to happen. While the NCAA could have attempted to coordinate their rule change with a parallel age-based effort by USL, my guess is that they did not want to hitch their efforts to that wagon knowing full well that a failure on USL to implement that would have brought down their rule with it. the best that can be hoped for now, is that the NCAA rule pushes USL to more quickly move in the direction of an age-based system. Even then, organizations can buck that trend by not being dependent upon USL affiliation, but that will be determined by how what the masses choose to do in the face of such a USL change. If other more mature sports are the model (baseball, soccer, hockey), most will follow along.


USL put out there guidelines over a year ago - which are age based, in single year increments, with Sept 1 cutoff.

http://www.uslacrosse.org/sites/def.../player-segmentation-task-force-recs.pdf

Unfortunately the club lacrosse industry does follow or need to follow these guidelines




If US lacrosse actually cared to enforce these "guidelines" they would not provide insurance for violators. We should not be providing our US Lacrosse numbers to any tournament that does not enforce age based restrictions. They are a useless organization that does nothing for the sport.