BACK OF THE CAGE
MOST RECENT POSTS
Boys High School Lax
by Anonymous. 04/10/20 05:28 AM
Boys High School
by Anonymous. 04/09/20 08:39 PM
Girls 2021-11th Grade Fall 2019/Summer 2020
by Anonymous. 04/09/20 06:45 PM
Forum Statistics
Forums19
Topics1,988
Posts263,663
Members2,178
Most Online62,980
Feb 6th, 2020
SUBSCRIBE


FOLLOW US ON TWITTER
Previous Thread
Next Thread
New Reply
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 32 of 37 1 2 30 31 32 33 34 36 37
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: Anonymous] #256514
02/08/18 10:07 PM
02/08/18 10:07 PM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I, for one, have no problem with a family holding a kid back (or reclassing him if that is the proper word) so that he can be in whatever grade they want the kid to be in. It just should be true that in youth lacrosse, these kids should play vs kids their same age. So if I have a 2005 kid, I want him to play against 2005 kids (or use a Sept 1-Aug 30 year). I don't care if his opponents are in 7th grade, 9th grade, 5th grade, or no grade at all. With regard to school lacrosse (Middle School Teams, JV, Varsity), there is a fair amount of consistency within leagues, conferences, ect. My kids are suburban NY public school kids. There are very few extreme hold backs in the public schools. The extreme holdbacks are mostly at the prep school, catholic schools, ect. The publics and the privates largely don't compete against each other except for non-league games that are voluntarily scheduled.



You may have no issue with it. I do, Ill paint this picture on the academic front; on age kid who is undersized, always played up, is a prospective D1 player at a few schools, as well as a top 10 student with 1300's SAT. Had not been for pre-1st hold backs, would have been a top 1, 2 or 3 student and this in a public NY school now is 15. So yeah, I think there is an issue, not just in sports. Why, because if "they" didnt hold their child back they would not have been a top 25 student if they were in their state intended/appropriate class/grade. Instead, they changed their child's "stars" which in turned impacted this student athlete!!!!

And you say, everything balances out in college. But no, it doesn't, how can it. Each recruiting class at a school has what, at most, 12 recruits. If you are a goalie, a Fogo, an LSM, or a Lefty Attack there are truly 20 coveted spots in your recruited year. Now, over half the top 10 school have recruits in any given position that is a Hold-back of some sort. Compound this over 4 years the needle has moved further away from the coaches wanting a true on age athlete.

It was best shown that, an athlete who works out at the same level at 23 as they did at 21 is in fact faster/stronger and both mentally/physically more mature at 23 than 21.

.



Your reasoning why you dont like it is the reason people do it.

Reply Quote
BACK OF THE CAGE SPONSORS

Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: Anonymous] #256570
02/09/18 05:55 PM
02/09/18 05:55 PM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I, for one, have no problem with a family holding a kid back (or reclassing him if that is the proper word) so that he can be in whatever grade they want the kid to be in. It just should be true that in youth lacrosse, these kids should play vs kids their same age. So if I have a 2005 kid, I want him to play against 2005 kids (or use a Sept 1-Aug 30 year). I don't care if his opponents are in 7th grade, 9th grade, 5th grade, or no grade at all. With regard to school lacrosse (Middle School Teams, JV, Varsity), there is a fair amount of consistency within leagues, conferences, ect. My kids are suburban NY public school kids. There are very few extreme hold backs in the public schools. The extreme holdbacks are mostly at the prep school, catholic schools, ect. The publics and the privates largely don't compete against each other except for non-league games that are voluntarily scheduled.



You may have no issue with it. I do, Ill paint this picture on the academic front; on age kid who is undersized, always played up, is a prospective D1 player at a few schools, as well as a top 10 student with 1300's SAT. Had not been for pre-1st hold backs, would have been a top 1, 2 or 3 student and this in a public NY school now is 15. So yeah, I think there is an issue, not just in sports. Why, because if "they" didnt hold their child back they would not have been a top 25 student if they were in their state intended/appropriate class/grade. Instead, they changed their child's "stars" which in turned impacted this student athlete!!!!

And you say, everything balances out in college. But no, it doesn't, how can it. Each recruiting class at a school has what, at most, 12 recruits. If you are a goalie, a Fogo, an LSM, or a Lefty Attack there are truly 20 coveted spots in your recruited year. Now, over half the top 10 school have recruits in any given position that is a Hold-back of some sort. Compound this over 4 years the needle has moved further away from the coaches wanting a true on age athlete.

It was best shown that, an athlete who works out at the same level at 23 as they did at 21 is in fact faster/stronger and both mentally/physically more mature at 23 than 21.

.



Your reasoning why you dont like it is the reason people do it.

Have to say, that’s your problem, not the hold back parents. You want an even playing field, then hold back. Otherwise, since it’s filly within the rules, too bad.

Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: Anonymous] #256596
02/10/18 09:53 AM
02/10/18 09:53 AM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I, for one, have no problem with a family holding a kid back (or reclassing him if that is the proper word) so that he can be in whatever grade they want the kid to be in. It just should be true that in youth lacrosse, these kids should play vs kids their same age. So if I have a 2005 kid, I want him to play against 2005 kids (or use a Sept 1-Aug 30 year). I don't care if his opponents are in 7th grade, 9th grade, 5th grade, or no grade at all. With regard to school lacrosse (Middle School Teams, JV, Varsity), there is a fair amount of consistency within leagues, conferences, ect. My kids are suburban NY public school kids. There are very few extreme hold backs in the public schools. The extreme holdbacks are mostly at the prep school, catholic schools, ect. The publics and the privates largely don't compete against each other except for non-league games that are voluntarily scheduled.



You may have no issue with it. I do, Ill paint this picture on the academic front; on age kid who is undersized, always played up, is a prospective D1 player at a few schools, as well as a top 10 student with 1300's SAT. Had not been for pre-1st hold backs, would have been a top 1, 2 or 3 student and this in a public NY school now is 15. So yeah, I think there is an issue, not just in sports. Why, because if "they" didnt hold their child back they would not have been a top 25 student if they were in their state intended/appropriate class/grade. Instead, they changed their child's "stars" which in turned impacted this student athlete!!!!

And you say, everything balances out in college. But no, it doesn't, how can it. Each recruiting class at a school has what, at most, 12 recruits. If you are a goalie, a Fogo, an LSM, or a Lefty Attack there are truly 20 coveted spots in your recruited year. Now, over half the top 10 school have recruits in any given position that is a Hold-back of some sort. Compound this over 4 years the needle has moved further away from the coaches wanting a true on age athlete.

It was best shown that, an athlete who works out at the same level at 23 as they did at 21 is in fact faster/stronger and both mentally/physically more mature at 23 than 21.

.



Your reasoning why you dont like it is the reason people do it.

Have to say, that’s your problem, not the hold back parents. You want an even playing field, then hold back. Otherwise, since it’s filly within the rules, too bad.


Spoken like a true holdback apologist. Majority dislike the YOUTH aspect of holdbacks not HS. It is wrong at Youth level. It should be changed to age. Common sense tells you that, unless you are a holdback apologist.

At HS its always been grade based and for most kids puberty has kicked in or is on its way. There are always going to be a few moaners but the vast Majority accept it without even caring about ages, its HS. But apologists like you cant tell the difference.

Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: lax516] #300661
03/25/20 12:39 PM
03/25/20 12:39 PM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



The problem with reclassing is total cheating by clubs at the youth level. You have 16 year olds playing against 13/14 year old kids. Totally disgusting. At the high school level for prep schools they reclass for various reasons.....fine....stay in you age group when you go to club ball. Problem solved.

I would be totally embarrassed having my 16 year old son play against 13 year olds. (MADLAX, BBL, LAXACHUSETTS...just to name a few guilty clubs) Some parents and clubs don't have a problem with this.

Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: lax516] #300669
03/25/20 04:31 PM
03/25/20 04:31 PM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



US Lax has no guts, never have. If soccer can have a validated age and team based player card so can lax. The travel clubs yield too much power more than the US Lax governing body. What a twisted model.

Reply Quote
Sponsored Links
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: lax516] #300670
03/25/20 05:05 PM
03/25/20 05:05 PM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



It’s one of the stupidest discussions that never, ever seems to end. In youth sports, soccer, hockey, baseball all have age based play. Why is this such an ongoing conversation with lax. Not high school, not college. Youth is what I’m talking about. Shouldn’t competition at the youth ages be on a level playing field. It’s called fair competition. How can anyone debate that age based isn’t fair. There is no answer to that. Age based is fair. Grade based in many instances is unfair. That’s it. If your held back academically, or social issues, that’s life, I understand. In those instances parents should have their kids play up a grade to be on age. That’s would I would do. My 11 year old son would play with 11 year old kids. That’s called level playing field. Incredible that people still debate this.

Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: lax516] #300674
03/25/20 07:39 PM
03/25/20 07:39 PM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Unless your kid is born in june, july or august and then you think age based is unfair.

Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: lax516] #300676
03/25/20 10:08 PM
03/25/20 10:08 PM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Kids aren’t all going to be born same month. Let’s stop with the ridiculous comments. If your son is born June, July, or August. He is playing with kids less than a year older. If the cutoff was Jan 1, then kids Nov and Dec, would be 10,11 months younger than the oldest. We all understand there can be kids 11 months younger. But 11 months isn’t, 2,3 years. I couldn’t care what the cutoff date was. Just have a date like all other sports, enforce that date, then it would be as fair as possible. Plus this notIntelligent conversation can finally end. There is nothing else to say on this topic.

Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: lax516] #300679
03/26/20 06:13 AM
03/26/20 06:13 AM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Sure there is. Parents are mad their little babies born in September, October and November don't get the built in age advantage. Hang in there Mom.

Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: lax516] #300705
03/26/20 08:09 PM
03/26/20 08:09 PM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



If the spring Hs season is cxld? Does that mean all kids get another year of varsity? I ask, because I can see some reclass action.

Reply Quote
Sponsored Links
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: Anonymous] #300710
03/26/20 08:55 PM
03/26/20 08:55 PM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Originally Posted by Anonymous
If the spring Hs season is cxld? Does that mean all kids get another year of varsity? I ask, because I can see some reclass action.


You want little Johnny to be a Senior in HS again? Get a life!

Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: Anonymous] #300712
03/27/20 08:09 AM
03/27/20 08:09 AM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
If the spring Hs season is cxld? Does that mean all kids get another year of varsity? I ask, because I can see some reclass action.


You want little Johnny to be a Senior in HS again? Get a life!


It was a question followed by statement, I can see underclassmen doing it. Please work of reading comprehension.

Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: lax516] #300713
03/27/20 09:23 AM
03/27/20 09:23 AM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



If the kid had a chance to go to the nba, I’d say reclass him. With this sport, if it were my son, he would go to college, then get a job. The upside with this sport is limited to saving 12 grand a year in college, maybe working a lacrosse camp for 300 dollars a week. No thanks.

Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: lax516] #300714
03/27/20 10:00 AM
03/27/20 10:00 AM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



You'd have to move the child from public to private to reclass unless the kid was failing academically in most districts. In private, you run the risk of not being age eligible anyway unless they waive that requirement. Not happening on any approved board level.

Reply Quote
Re: Age and Reclassification. The good the bad the ugly! [Re: Anonymous] #300715
03/27/20 11:33 AM
03/27/20 11:33 AM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



this is
Originally Posted by Anonymous
If the kid had a chance to go to the nba, I’d say reclass him. With this sport, if it were my son, he would go to college, then get a job. The upside with this sport is limited to saving 12 grand a year in college, maybe working a lacrosse camp for 300 dollars a week. No thanks.


This is the part of the conversation I find funny. Maybe I am in the minority but for the most part we are probably talking about the elite or excellent player who reclassifies (I know those who will say if they are elite why will they reclassify) but putting that aside I cant imagine people reclassifying bc they want their kid to go play in the PLL for a few bucks or saving 12 grand in college. If reclassifying gets a boy into the Ivies or Duke or Va etc or certain schools in the NESCAC versus a second rate school then the parent did well by the child. Its not about a few month advantage in high school or even a year its about getting your child he best education possible which will potentially lead to greater chances and choices in life. Note I said potentially bc you can be successful going to lower end state school. Now before anyone says I am a parent of a hold back, my son will enter his senior year as a 16 year old and turn 17 in January of his senior year thus clearly younger than holdbacks. I do not begrudge the parents who seek to have their kids go to Deerfield or Brunswick or any other school if they are able to provide the best for their kid then good for them. My son will have to step up.

Reply Quote
Page 32 of 37 1 2 30 31 32 33 34 36 37
Quick Reply

Options
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
CAPTCHA Verification





Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1