US Lacrosse Community Forum Forums NORTHEAST LACROSSE BOTC MAIN FORUM (LI, CT, WC) Boys 2018 Fall 2014/Summer 2015

If he is 15 and hasn't reached puberty yet then something is wrong. How tall is he? How tall are you and your wife?

6'4 and did not grow until 11th grade! Nothing is wrong. Kids with late birthdays will develop later than holdbacks or early birthdays. How tall wife is irrelevant for when a kid hits puberty!

That was my point to being with, trying pick kids who are 14 and 15th years old. for a team 4 years later has alot of factors going into it. picking a team of seventeen years old for a team 2 years away would be alot easier.

That is laughable, football recruits as early as they can. In football the (3 star and over) student athlete decides where he wants to go and breaks verbals all the time. He is looking for his school even after he has verbaled to another. Verbals just get other school interested in a bonefide prospect.

No idiot has to do with your height. The guy said his son is 15 and hasn't reached puberty. Would like to know how tall is the kid now and how tall the parents are. That does make a difference when it comes to your sons height. I'm sure the kid us in the first stages of puberty.

Let me keep it simple, if you pick a team of the best 20 players after 9th grade, then pick a team after 11 grade do you think it would be the same 20 kids? I will not keep you hanging the answer is no.

Who is picking all 20. No one college is taking all 20. Colleges are taking 3/4 of these top students. Of the 20 I am sure 15 are still top prospects in 11th grade. Sure 5 or so may just get marginally better but for those who were able to recruit the players who remained the top players I think they would say it was worth it.

I agree with the article, in the near future for many reasons, I think the signing day will become the date we know where all the players are going.

Very good point! It would be way different!

Don't get so caught up on height. Juse read a great article about 5'5" soyosset senior who won mvp of the Dicks national tournament a few weeks ago. Be a a smart, skilled player. Kid ran circles around his six foot counterparts. That's what matters!

No. Agree with you. Time and time again many of the studs after 8th grade who are physically mature are not the studs in 12 th grade because some of their peers caught up to them.

No idiot.....how tall parents are has nothing to do with puberty. Your doctor can let you know if you are having trouble recognizing signs. Height is relative. Most of the 14 and 15 year old kids on my sons team who reached puberty are the smaller kids on the team. They are done growing!

I don't know what all you guys are seeing that I am not seeing.

While I agree the kids who went through puberty early sometimes don't continue to excel and other kids can sometimes catch up. But, in my 10 years watching my own kids play this sport and 4 others, the very best athletes tended to be the very best athletes all the way through HS.

I had one in this very best athlete category and two outside but strong players nonetheless.

I really think at this age, people need to be realistic, if your kid is a stud you know it. If your kid is not a stud and you find yourself making excuses--he is a late bloomer, he is playing against hold backs, the coaches don't give him enough opportunity...chances are strong he will not be playing D-1 athletics. But that is ok.

Believe me, having one playing at that level and one that didn't but will likely play club at his school and one now trying to get noticed just like most of your boys, it is not all it is cracked up to be. Now, I would never share that with my young boy, he will try hard and give it his best and do all the work, but we as a family will let the chips fall where they may without worrying about the fairness of the process or whether he plays D-1 lax.

Remember, average lax scholarships are around 25%. Some may get more but that means others will get less. If your kid is also top of his class (and depending on the school) he may also get some academic $. So a package of 50-75% is pretty good by today's standards. Most of you, like me, will not get any need based financial aid so it is academic and/or athletic only.

Worse than all that, which none of your club coaches will tell you, most D-1 programs are not fully funded and very few on the list are giving academic money. Check out the patriot league--Holy Cross, Colgate, Lafayette...not much in the way of lax or academic dollars to be found which is why they are not successful at early recruiting. They have no money so why would your stud commit?

Now if you are wealthy and your kid is a stud and also top of his class, Ivy is the way to go and lax very well may be your ticket in. However, this also has drawbacks and people tend to overestimate their kids intellect. Some of those Ivy profs aren't very keen on student athletes , so make sure your kid can do the work and make extra sure there is academic support...lots of boys don't make it through.


Remember, please remember, D-1 sport is a full time job. the kids time is accounted for from the time they wake up till head hits pillow, it is simply not for everyone. There is life after lax even though most of us have been brainwashed to believe if ours isn't playing D-1, we did something wrong or that the system wasn't fair.

Let the chips fall where they may and don't put so much pressure on your kid or yourself.

As for early recruiting, these guys have been watching lax for years, if they want your kid to commit to their school, and you and your boy like the school and the coach, go ahead, you have nothing to lose. You can always change your mind and use your offer as a chip for the next one. That is the way to play this game...

^^^^ Thoughtful posts like the above certainly make BOTC worth reading (although I love some of the LI insults too).

Could not be more on target. My son is a big kid, he was taught by a smart coach at an early age to use his speed not his size. Great advise that has worked well for him.

One of my work colleagues has a son who plays football at Vanderbilt...not the super big time, but a D1 school. He told me that nearly every coacch who started to recruit his son around 15 years old asked "how tall are your parents, aunts and uncles?" and "did your parents or any of their siblings play college sports?, if so, what and where?"

I always think about that on the sidelines here in Maryland. I have an older HS son who went through the whole club and schools scene, and I was always amazed to look at what were the U-15 top shelf kids, then I'd look at their parents and think, woah, that won't work. Dads who maybe played a little HS sports and Moms who look like they might have done some gardening for exercise is all. I've tracked these thoughts now that these kids are older, and many are committed to top D1 lacrosse schools, and it is pretty clear I was right. The parents and older siblings are almost always a perfect tell for what the kids look like as they even out to fully grown and are who they are size and athletic wise. If I were a D1 lacrosse coach compelled to recruit early, I'd recruit the U-15 players who could play but also look for kids who had parents who were accomplished athletes as well. If you are going to project, that is a great hedge.

Don't get so caught up on height. Juse read a great article about 5'5" soyosset senior who won mvp of the Dicks national tournament a few weeks ago. Be a a smart, skilled player. Kid ran circles around his six foot counterparts. That's what matters! [/quote]

You're caught up a bit in yester-year I think. With the growth of lacrosse you will see more athleticism in the game. A 5'5 attack man isn't going to run around any high level D1 pole anymore because they are all starting to body type out at 6'2 - 6'5 with skill handling a 6 foot shaft. As lacrosse grows as a sport coaches will target both skill and physicality like they do in other real sports. I am sure somewhere on Long Island you could tell me all about a 5'10 and 210 lb linebacker who never misses tackles and is smart on blitzes. He can't play his sport in D1 either.

Amen

Remember, average lax scholarships are around 25%. Some may get more but that means others will get less. If your kid is also top of his class (and depending on the school) he may also get some academic $. So a package of 50-75% is pretty good by today's standards. Most of you, like me, will not get any need based financial aid so it is academic and/or athletic only.
[/quote]

You're obviously well informed. Do you have a well informed guess on how many D1 teams are fully funded? Service academies and Ivy are not relevant in this, so the sample size drops to about 55 programs. 5 in ACC, 6 in Big 10, Denver makes a clean dozen. Is that it?

You're obviously well informed. Do you have a well informed guess on how many D1 teams are fully funded? Service academies and Ivy are not relevant in this, so the sample size drops to about 55 programs. 5 in ACC, 6 in Big 10, Denver makes a clean dozen. Is that it? [/quote]

Not the original poster, but I think you can find this information along with whether a particular school gives academic money, on the school website.

mine committed early and that is how we parsed through schools that we would focus on. for us, money was important and I can echo original poster's comments on how much is available for a D-1 kid. I often hear about the kids that got a full ride, but the reality is that a full ride for lax is almost impossible.

My son is going to the 3d Jake Reed event in Arizona in two weeks. Can someone that has been to one of the first two weekends in Florida let us know what to expect? Thank You.

I wish D1 coaches would open their eyes and realize that 6'3" defenders simply cannot cover 5'6" attackmen. You cannot play lacrosse looking down.

Perhaps they should bust out the weegie board or magic eight ball as well. That might be the stupidest commentary ever... I have seen many parents with ZERO athletic ability produce great athletes... I've also seen some of dumbest people on earth produce Ivy League quality students... Conversely, I've seen Lacrosse Superstars produce kids that couldn't play HS ball let alone at any level in college. One really has nothing to do with the other.

You're obviously well informed. Do you have a well informed guess on how many D1 teams are fully funded? Service academies and Ivy are not relevant in this, so the sample size drops to about 55 programs. 5 in ACC, 6 in Big 10, Denver makes a clean dozen. Is that it? [/quote]

there are others - Loyola, Delaware, Umass, UMBC, Towson, Gtown I believe have the full 12.6. Other I'm sure. I would think most of the new programs like highpoint, Richmond, furman are too. you would think ADs would due their due diligence and know that can't be competitive without scholarships or being academic elite like ivy

You're caught up a bit in yester-year I think. With the growth of lacrosse you will see more athleticism in the game. A 5'5 attack man isn't going to run around any high level D1 pole anymore because they are all starting to body type out at 6'2 - 6'5 with skill handling a 6 foot shaft. As lacrosse grows as a sport coaches will target both skill and physicality like they do in other real sports. I am sure somewhere on Long Island you could tell me all about a 5'10 and 210 lb linebacker who never misses tackles and is smart on blitzes. He can't play his sport in D1 either.[/quote]

Rob Pannell, Will Manny. Maybe a little taller than 5'5 but they are among the best. you have to be tough as nails and crazy good but still places for under 6 feet at the top levels of lax

Good ones can... and that's what D1 coaches want. As a former defenseman I'll tell you that big and quick beats small and quick every day.

Rob Pannell, Will Manny. Maybe a little taller than 5'5 but they are among the best. you have to be tough as nails and crazy good but still places for under 6 feet at the top levels of lax [/quote]

The soyosset mvp played against top ranked D1 commits. Many of whom were well over 6'. They were unable to shut him down. Just saying!

Pannell is 5'10 and Manny is 5'9. Those are examples of gritty, albiet already undersized in the new order, lacrosse attackmen. Remember, the MLL you see today or and the college game you see today is the product of hotbed only kids who came up BEFORE the game blew up in other geographic regions. Taking it down to 5'5 is an extreme of the extremes for the Pannell / Manny generation, and now in the college game Sankey and Cavanaugh may be the last of the waterbugs. This is just my guess, maybe you are right with a point that this game can be played where a high IQ and fast kid that small can still play with poles 9-12 inches taller. And that whole can't play lacrosse looking down at the chest of a defender is pretty silly. Those lacrosse All-Americans of yester-year wouldn't be D1 prospects today.

I did make the genetics comment. Obviously some disagree, and of course some great athletes are born into non-athlete families. My point was insofar as early recruiting is concerned, D1 lacrosse coaches seem to be off the grid too far grabbing those lights out little U-15 kids whose parents are also unathletic twerps. If you are going to project, do it with some better data. But maybe you and the college lacrosse coaches are all right, and the football recruiters from SEC, Big 10, Pac 12, etc have it all wrong and size, strength, speed taken together as a baseline have absolutely nothing to do with it.

And to be perfectly fair, a lot of defensive lacrosse dads who played some a generation ago love to point out about junior's lacrosse pedigree, IQ he inherited from pops are a principal reason why colleges should only recruit from LI or MD. You think your kids inherit lacrosse brains but not your physical make-ups? Stand up on a couple of phone books and answer that one for us. We'd love to hear again about how lacrosse IQ and being sired by someone who played for SUNY Bingo back in the day somehow translates but the physical attributes do not.

Rob Pannell, Will Manny. Maybe a little taller than 5'5 but they are among the best. you have to be tough as nails and crazy good but still places for under 6 feet at the top levels of lax [/quote]

5'10" and 5'9" respectively. Not short guys. I think the 6+ foot comment was meant for defensemen though.

Jordan wolf 5'8"
Josh Dionne 5'7"
Both were major contributors and top point leaders for Duke. Which has arguably the best D1 lax progrsm. So stop your nonsense about size. Lax is about skill, agility, and attitude. There are plenty more examples of extremely successful lacrosse players that are on the shorter side!

How about Matt Kavanagh - listed at 5'8" probably closer to to 5'6" - leading scorer at ND?

Soyosset kid is committed/signed to Hopkins, not too shabby! Seems like the big programs are taking some shorter kids

You're caught up a bit in yester-year I think. With the growth of lacrosse you will see more athleticism in the game. A 5'5 attack man isn't going to run around any high level D1 pole anymore because they are all starting to body type out at 6'2 - 6'5 with skill handling a 6 foot shaft. As lacrosse grows as a sport coaches will target both skill and physicality like they do in other real sports. I am sure somewhere on Long Island you could tell me all about a 5'10 and 210 lb linebacker who never misses tackles and is smart on blitzes. He can't play his sport in D1 either.[/quote]
I can also point out that that there are not many 6'2" -6'5" football players who can cover Darren Sproles out of the backfield or Wes Welker in the slot! It is all about match ups and all those Athletic, Huge monsters will still trip over themselves because they can't change direction with the "little" guys! The bottom line is if you CAN play you WILL play! No matter what your size is.

That is True and that is why Calvin Johnson has been the best receiver in the NFL, But there are not going to be many 6'3" white boys from Long Island with the quickness of a 5'8" kid. Fact!

I will take it a step further for all of you ex Lax studs from yesteryear, Most schools (aside from Manhasset,GC and WM) lacrosse was a sport played by kids who didn't make the baseball team! You were most likely way down on the athletic totem pole in your school! I am not saying there were NO good athletes who played lax but the majority were flat out baseball rejects! So you can tell anyone you want how great you were against the other cast off's, but YOU know how it really was back then!

I'm 5'8" and I met will manny. No more then 5'7"

Went to farmingdale and since I can remember This town has been football players playing lacrosse. Not kids cut from the baseball team. I could say the same about most of the towns I played against also. Your theory is false. Baseball has never been or never will be the #1 spring sport on Long Island. That is a fact.

Couldn't agree more..Kavanaugh most exciting attackman in country not named Thompson last year..it's about the heart not the height

Uou must have went to high school after 1990! Half the High Schools didn't even have Lacrosse in the 70's and 80's!

As main stream as you think lax is, it's not football or hoops. Speed and stick skills trump everything. If you have size along with all that great. There will always be a range of sizes in the game.