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]

If that is the best argument that can be made then it’s not surprising it took so long for someone to actually write it down. The industry (which is exactly what it is now as opposed to then) should take ownership for what it is putting on the field tourney after tourney. Seems to me there are plenty of people at the tournaments you are describing who don’t like the way it is now – I’m one of them and people talk about it all the time. Diminishes the entire experience – even for the older kids.

This industry makes a large portion of its’ collective income off of younger and younger players and they continue to organize around something you say was set-up for the super talented few heading into HS oh so many years ago. Why should all these kids who love playing be told either play against kids older than you or play Rec and go have an ice cream. I’ll bet your son’s club (assuming you’re a parent) or your team/club (assuming you are a coach/club owner) - which only plays in the very best of the best tourneys is probably holding tryouts w/in the next few days/weeks for the “classes” of 2027 and 2028 (7-8 year olds) and cashing those checks the same way they cashed the uber elite HS prep player’s check.

Organize around age so the experience is level and better for all youth players and if that doesn't hone a player’s skills well enough - have him “play-up” age wise to get ready for future HS showcases rather than “play-down” age wise which is what happens now. It isn’t the skill level that is the issue during youth lacrosse that people object to - it is the size, speed and physicality issue of older v. younger. There will still be the best players on the best teams playing in the most competitive tournaments – why would that change in an age based system? No reason the way it was is the way it should be any longer and there is no dilution effect at the top.

You're "I win" comment exposes you for the kind of left back proponent you really are. I'm glad that you think you are the big winner here - compelling interested, talented and dedicated kids to play in an environment that few if any believe to be optimal - nice W! FWIW - not actually whining in a forum set up to specifically discuss this issue. Go celebrate your big win with a Cohiba champ.