Seriously, what is your fascination with pretending there is a birthday year team, and creating this false reality in your mind? There is not a 17 year old team, not a 18 year old team, not a 19 year old team. They have High School teams, by grade. Other than trying to disparage a very large batch of private school kids, what is your point? How about calling people that don't take the extra year, if available, lazy impatient cheapskate mf'ers. Is there really a parent out there that thinks an extra year of education is a detriment in any way? It's available at some schools, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with taking it if available, because 'Merica.
No one is complaining about your kid taking an extra year of education, or repeating 8th grade, or whatever it is you do. Have at it. Its just that when your kid plays travel lacrosse, he should be on a team populated with kids of similar age, and he should be playing games against other teams similarly rostered. That is all. Put your kid in 3rd grade when he is 14 - no one cares. But when he plays travel lax, just have him play against other 14 year olds. That is all people are asking, and many people are advocating for such a system. This forum is one place where that advocacy happens.
The fascination with birth year teams is not in pretending that they exit. Its in wishing they exist. Why is this hard to understand?
For your High School team, it doesn't matter how old the kids are, so long as they are not above whatever age your governing body dictates is too old (in many places, it is capped at 19). But realize that HS competition is almost always organized amongst schools that have similar aged kids. NY public high schools compete only against NY public high schools, and these kids are largely the same age per grade. Prep schools play against Prep schools. Ect. Sometimes, teams voluntarily play outside their category (like a Yorktown type school playing a prep school in CT or something like that), but they do such voluntarily knowing what they are getting into - and the games never really count for anything - its not a league or sectional game.
But for travel lacrosse, where kids are competing against kids from all over the country regardless of state or high school, it should be an age-based system. That is how it is in most other team sports, and it works well. It would work well in lacrosse, and in undeniably better than the system we have now. If your kid is very good, he can play up against older kids at your choosing.
All the posters complaining about advocating for an age-based system never provide the one thing to make an actual argument: rationale for the grade-based system! Because there isn't one!
The rationale is that club was originally formed for kids that wanted to excel and definitely wanted to play Varsity in HS, then into college, so the system was set up for continuity from middle school into HS, which is obviously going to be grade-based, because HS events are showcases, not team trophy chases. Middle school was to build the teams, then HS was to showcase the players. Then, club got really popular, and everyone wanted to play, so it became really just an expensive rec league, and the younger teams were added and more average teams have emerged. Now, folks don't want it to be high level HS prep, they want it to be a universal rec league, and with the rec league mentality comes rec league rules. My question, does rec not exist anymore, for those that want to play the game as a mere youth activity? Club should be high level HS prep for anyone that wants high level HS prep. What's wrong now, the teams that treat it as high level HS prep aren't playing in events with teams that treat it like expensive rec, they play in high level HS prep-style events against each other.
[/quote]
Another lame argument. How come hockey does it age based at the highest levels? Same for soccer? Why can't you prep for high level HS and college against kids your own age? The best of the best of the best can play AAA leagues/divisions against kids their same age. How is an elite player's development disadvantaged by playing against other elite players his same age? If a kid is even better than the best kids his age than he can play in a higher age bracket.
The college showcase argument is lame also. When college coaches watch HS and MS kids, they don't care how good they are now. They are instead trying to figure out who will be good when they reach college. They are trying to see who projects to be great when they are older. How on earth are you able to do that when some kids on the field are 15 and some are 13? A 15 year old dominating a 13 year old tells you nothing about whether or not that 15 year old projects to be great in college. The same is true for the 13 year old being dominated. But if a 15 year old dominates other 15 year olds, than you have some data to work with.
And please no one respond with the equally lame argument that "they will be playing against each other in college so you might as well compete now." When said 13 year old gets to college, and its late winter/spring of his freshman year, he will be 18-close to 19 in all likelihood, which means he will be fully matured and physically able to compete against a 20-21 year old. The difference is either nil or trivial at that point. But when they are 12 and 14 or 13 and 15, or 14 and 16, etc., the difference will be stark outside of a few outliers who mature very early.[/quote]
Did you have a petition set up at any tourneys this year? On here, it's just whining. I win, because it is my way now. [/quote]
"Your" way?? And you do realize you are arguing against multiple posters? Lastly, as if petitioning is the sole means to accomplish anything? I'd argue that THAT approach might be the most useless - you can get people to sign petitions for practically anything, in many cases for outlandish 'causes'.
Reply
Quote