Tryouts launched for Igloo Lacrosse, Legacy Lacrosse & Many More Club Teams - Check Our Forums > Tryouts to see when other teams have touts!
BACK OF THE CAGE
MOST RECENT POSTS
Girls High School Lax
by Anonymous - 07/05/22 12:03 PM
Boys 2027-7th Grade Fall 2021/Summer 2022
by Anonymous - 07/05/22 12:03 PM
Girls 2027-7th Grade Fall 2021/Summer 2022
by Anonymous - 07/05/22 11:42 AM
True Annapolis
by Anonymous - 07/05/22 11:36 AM
Westchester NY Youth Lacrosse
by Anonymous - 07/05/22 11:30 AM
Forum Statistics
Forums20
Topics3,154
Posts341,775
Members2,465
Most Online62,980
Feb 6th, 2020
SUBSCRIBE


FOLLOW US ON TWITTER
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 81 of 187 1 2 79 80 81 82 83 186 187
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
Anonymous #50026 12/18/13 11:38 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by VaLaxDad
I don't understand your point. Reading through these threads, most posters are upset with reclassed 16yo competing with 14 yo son for an opportunity to play D1 lacrosse. Me too. Frankly, the system as it is rewards the older, reclassed kid with little downside other than cost. Enforcing age restrictions at the youth level, thereby forcing older kids to play out of class, makes kindergarten holdbacks a little more painful-no friends on team, car pools for Mom, or social hour with fellow parents at tourneys. 4yr HS restriction would curb reclassers by forcing another year of youth ball. Choosing 2-3 practices a week and higher costs for a year of physical growth over 5 practices, better competition and coaching becomes a much more difficult decision.

It is not perfect, but it would be a start.

Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by VaLaxDad
I read in another thread where the [lacrosse]'s Sporting Goods Tournament of Champions is requiring birth certificates to enforce age restrictions. Couple youth age restrictions with 4yr limitations for HS players and you will go a long way toward resolving reclassing issues.

It would neither prevent the kindergarten holdbacks, nor the 8th grade reclassers, but it would eliminate some advantages. Right now, an old 4th grader would still play with his classmates. Age restrictions would force him to play with the 5th grade teams. Additionally, many reclassed 8th graders play JV (or varsity) to continue their development. If these players were forced to play another year of youth, it would make this a less attractive option.



In the end, it really won't matter as far a recruiting goes because at the college level the coaches are still going to recruit the oldest players for their freshman class. Additionally, I will predict there will be more red shirts and pgs like the old days. It's not like the top colleges will fill their freshman classes with younger kids. They'll just say we want you if you pg.


My point is that all those measures will even the playing field for entering freshman in high school. Just be careful what you wish for. Just remember that for those with late birthdays that fall AFTER they enter high school, let's say Aug-Nov, they will be a 17 yr old college freshman. College coaches will bypass the 13/14 yr old h.s. freshman when they become seniors all day long. We will hear more of "we're interested but you're just too young, do a pg yr and the spot is yours".


So you are saying an 13/14 year old HS freshman M who is 6-0 and 170 has a weaker chance over a 15 year old 5-7 155 pounder?
The discussion has been about age but physical characteristics comes into play as well.

BACK OF THE CAGE SPONSORS

Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
Anonymous #50027 12/18/13 12:07 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
My point is that all those measures will even the playing field for entering freshman in high school. Just be careful what you wish for. Just remember that for those with late birthdays that fall AFTER they enter high school, let's say Aug-Nov, they will be a 17 yr old college freshman. College coaches will bypass the 13/14 yr old h.s. freshman when they become seniors all day long. We will hear more of "we're interested but you're just too young, do a pg yr and the spot is yours".


So in other words, because the scholarship money in D1 lacrosse is so low, coaches don't want to tie up money for 5 years like in football. Lacrosse coaches want manic lacrosse parents to pay for a redshirt year at a prep school. One way is to repeat 8th grade or 9th grade, another way is do a PG year.

Maybe the college coaches are reading this thread and laughing at us, the outrage over kids repeating grades and all. We are basically underwriting their unwillingness to redshirt kids like in football for the same reason...they want kids on the weights and more physically mature for the 4 years they play. Has anyone asked a college coach for their son this: "He is a good student, so there is not an academic reason to do this. Will you take him and designate him as a redshirt freshman when he arrives?" Now here is the test: if your kid really is a very special lacrosse prodigy, who has the leverage? I have to admit, didn't occur to me until reading the latest thoughtful comments including the one above.

We're idiots.

Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
Anonymous #50029 12/18/13 12:37 PM
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 51
V
Back of THE CAGE
Offline
Back of THE CAGE
V
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 51
I'm not sure how your concern relates to the proposal. The situation that you describe exists today at the HS level, only it is worse because the comparison "Freshman" may be 16 yo. The proposal would not effect those seeking PG yrs- the late bloomers (Rob Pannell, for example). PG is a real option, the offer's exist as you describe, and, for a late bloomer, they represent a real opportunity vs. none at all.
You may have a legitimate concern at the youth level since states have varying school year cut offs, and currently NY is 3 months out of alignment with the USLacrosse age guidelines. Not sure how to resolve, but I think the proposal still has merit and is better than the status quo.

Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
VaLaxDad #50030 12/18/13 12:42 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by VaLaxDad
I'm not sure how your concern relates to the proposal. The situation that you describe exists today at the HS level, only it is worse because the comparison "Freshman" may be 16 yo. The proposal would not effect those seeking PG yrs- the late bloomers (Rob Pannell, for example). PG is a real option, the offer's exist as you describe, and, for a late bloomer, they represent a real opportunity vs. none at all.
You may have a legitimate concern at the youth level since states have varying school year cut offs, and currently NY is 3 months out of alignment with the USLacrosse age guidelines. Not sure how to resolve, but I think the proposal still has merit and is better than the status quo.


Don't you have a job? All you do is post around the Internet on multiple forums bragging about your son's Madlax team. Weird.

Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
VaLaxDad #50032 12/18/13 12:52 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by VaLaxDad
Maybe an unit ended consequence for a minority, but the proposal is still an improvement to the status quo. This is a non issue in DMV, because school cut off is Sept 30.
All in all better for a 17 yo to compete with an 18 yo than a 14 yo with an 16 yo.



My school cutoff is dec 1, not sept 1. And not for nothing but your 17yo college freshman would not only be competing with 18 year old but possibly 23 and 24 yr olds as was evidenced last season.

Sponsored Links
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
Anonymous #50034 12/18/13 01:19 PM
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 51
V
Back of THE CAGE
Offline
Back of THE CAGE
V
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 51
Interesting analysis, but, again, not a real consequence of the proposal to limit youth to age and HS to 4 yrs as a way of discouraging reclassers.
For me, it comes down to opportunity. Lax is a non-revenue sport at the collegiate level, particularly D1. There's not, and will not be in the near future, the $$ that exists in football and basketball. As such, redshirting and generous scholarships are the exception. In general, this is true of all non-revenue sports. Because of early recruiting, the PG year provides an opportunity to those late bloomers that doesn't otherwise exist.
The opportunity to gain admission to a quality university, defray some of the costs while working toward a goal, learning to compete and having fun are worthwhile pursuits in my book.
I believe my son will prevail on a level paying field. As it is, in the current D1 recruiting environment, that field is not level.
You can play a revenue sport instead, work within the realities of the current lax system, or try to effect change. As the parent of a 7th grader facing the real prospect of competing with reclassed kid for these precious opportunities, I would like to see change. I would like to build consensus on Boards like this to begin making a difference.
All Said, I welcome criticism, comment or friendly amendments.
Absent real change, "beating them" as it would be, I might just "join 'em" by reclassing my son too!

Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
My point is that all those measures will even the playing field for entering freshman in high school. Just be careful what you wish for. Just remember that for those with late birthdays that fall AFTER they enter high school, let's say Aug-Nov, they will be a 17 yr old college freshman. College coaches will bypass the 13/14 yr old h.s. freshman when they become seniors all day long. We will hear more of "we're interested but you're just too young, do a pg yr and the spot is yours".


So in other words, because the scholarship money in D1 lacrosse is so low, coaches don't want to tie up money for 5 years like in football. Lacrosse coaches want manic lacrosse parents to pay for a redshirt year at a prep school. One way is to repeat 8th grade or 9th grade, another way is do a PG year.

Maybe the college coaches are reading this thread and laughing at us, the outrage over kids repeating grades and all. We are basically underwriting their unwillingness to redshirt kids like in football for the same reason...they want kids on the weights and more physically mature for the 4 years they play. Has anyone asked a college coach for their son this: "He is a good student, so there is not an academic reason to do this. Will you take him and designate him as a redshirt freshman when he arrives?" Now here is the test: if your kid really is a very special lacrosse prodigy, who has the leverage? I have to admit, didn't occur to me until reading the latest thoughtful comments including the one above.

We're idiots.

Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
Anonymous #50037 12/18/13 01:25 PM
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 51
V
Back of THE CAGE
Offline
Back of THE CAGE
V
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 51
Example of what's wrong with America! Easy to criticize, hard to do something.

Have fun following my other posts!

Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by VaLaxDad
I'm not sure how your concern relates to the proposal. The situation that you describe exists today at the HS level, only it is worse because the comparison "Freshman" may be 16 yo. The proposal would not effect those seeking PG yrs- the late bloomers (Rob Pannell, for example). PG is a real option, the offer's exist as you describe, and, for a late bloomer, they represent a real opportunity vs. none at all.
You may have a legitimate concern at the youth level since states have varying school year cut offs, and currently NY is 3 months out of alignment with the USLacrosse age guidelines. Not sure how to resolve, but I think the proposal still has merit and is better than the status quo.


Don't you have a job? All you do is post around the Internet on multiple forums bragging about your son's Madlax team. Weird.

Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
CageSage #50038 12/18/13 01:54 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
As a point for discussion. There was a UNC commit today who's a 2016 reclassified, his brother committed last week to Hopkins and is a 2017 reclassified. Away from is this right or wrong.
How does a kid who got minimal attention in his original grade get so much better by doing nothing more than repeating a grade?
Are they better, or do they SHOW better?
It seems to me there will come time to pay the piper, and I assume it will be when the maturity playing field balances out in HS or early in college.
I'm starting to think the coaches really don't know what their doing. And maybe as a previous post states Duke is laughing all the way to the finals. The results speak for themselves, Hopkins and Virginia missed the tournament last year, UNC hasn't been to final 4 in 20 years.
No hate toward the boys, just interested to discuss the results of all this madness.

Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
Anonymous #50039 12/18/13 02:21 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Don't you have a job? All you do is post around the Internet on multiple forums bragging about your son's Madlax team. Weird.


Easy now with the personal attacks. I don't think this VaLaxGuy has done anything but put some constructive info on this thread.

After all, you posted during the 9-5. Put the donut down and step away from the keyboard, sir, no one needs to get hurt here.

Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
Anonymous #50040 12/18/13 02:52 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
As a point for discussion. There was a UNC commit today who's a 2016 reclassified, his brother committed last week to Hopkins and is a 2017 reclassified. Away from is this right or wrong.
How does a kid who got minimal attention in his original grade get so much better by doing nothing more than repeating a grade?
Are they better, or do they SHOW better?
It seems to me there will come time to pay the piper, and I assume it will be when the maturity playing field balances out in HS or early in college.
I'm starting to think the coaches really don't know what their doing. And maybe as a previous post states Duke is laughing all the way to the finals. The results speak for themselves, Hopkins and Virginia missed the tournament last year, UNC hasn't been to final 4 in 20 years.
No hate toward the boys, just interested to discuss the results of all this madness.


Have had many of the same thoughts. Since kids are committing now so much earlier than even 4/5 years ago (starting first half of freshman year now, over 100 2016s already committed as well at first half of their sophomore year) there is no data yet to support if early recruting correlates to college rankings/success. Will continue to be an interesting debate until there is more conclusive data or the NCAA grows a pair and slows the early recruting thing down.

Sponsored Links
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
Anonymous #50043 12/18/13 03:38 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Well, consider this. Many of these early recruits are from affluent areas, or have reclassified at private schools - I understand not all - just using a wide brush here - maybe these parents have essentially demonstrated that at the college level, cost will not be an issue. So scholarship money is not the most prevalant reason nor should it be i understand, but a college coach having this conversation with someone from a very affluent area, and is able to afford the college without financial assistance of any kind, athletic, academic, financial aid - I have to think his bursar's office will be pleased that he has 3-4 kids on the team that are paying 95% of the full price tag... When a 2017 early commits from Amityville or Freeport then it gets interesting... Again, broad strokes, I am sure it is not the case with every case or situation... I don't live in one of the most affluent towns either, so I apologize Iam not putting down A'ville or F'port - just using examples

Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
Anonymous #50044 12/18/13 04:06 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by VaLaxDad
I'm not sure how your concern relates to the proposal. The situation that you describe exists today at the HS level, only it is worse because the comparison "Freshman" may be 16 yo. The proposal would not effect those seeking PG yrs- the late bloomers (Rob Pannell, for example). PG is a real option, the offer's exist as you describe, and, for a late bloomer, they represent a real opportunity vs. none at all.
You may have a legitimate concern at the youth level since states have varying school year cut offs, and currently NY is 3 months out of alignment with the USLacrosse age guidelines. Not sure how to resolve, but I think the proposal still has merit and is better than the status quo.


Don't you have a job? All you do is post around the Internet on multiple forums bragging about your son's Madlax team. Weird.


And you spend all day reading the above mentioned forums...weird

Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
CageSage #50050 12/18/13 06:16 PM
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
C
Back of THE CAGE
*
OP Offline
Back of THE CAGE
*
C
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by CageSage
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Pardon the interruption...for those who experienced Brine. Who coaches the teams at the summer camp? Dont need names, just HS coaches, College, or?? Do they keep that coach the entire camp? Did they practice (with that coach or someone else?) as a team before attending the camp in the summer? Thanks
Please consult with Brine or their web site for your answers. As the Brine director opted not to partner with BOTC for this year's event, we have provided this event with more than enough air time to have questions answered to this obviously flawed event.

BOTC wanted to be part of the process on behalf of Long Islanders and regional players to shed some light on the overall process however the Brine director chose to go in another direction.

Now, it is time for the Brine folks to be the direct recipients of your questions.
Earlier today, BOTC was part of a one hour teleconference with Joel Franklin from the Brine National Lacrosse Classic to discuss many of the questions that have appeared here on the message boards. Discussions ranged from the tryout game plan to the evaluators and their selection process.

BOTC will share this information with our readers in the upcoming posts.

Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
CageSage #50051 12/18/13 06:23 PM
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
C
Back of THE CAGE
*
OP Offline
Back of THE CAGE
*
C
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
Brine National Lacrosse Classic Tryout Agenda

[Linked Image]

Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
CageSage #50052 12/18/13 06:30 PM
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
C
Back of THE CAGE
*
OP Offline
Back of THE CAGE
*
C
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,609
Likes: 1
Brine National Lacrosse Classic - Evaluators

The following individuals were the evaluators for the Long Island player selection process. Additional individual might have been helping to administer individual training stations however they were not involved in the selection process according to event organizers.

Jim Konen
Chris Roberts
Mike Hungerford
Kieran O'Brien
Steven Romano
John Reicherter
Tyler Begley
Michael Malave
Jeff Atlas
Ryan Kuhn
Chris Schreiber
Daniel Steigert
Tom Rooney
Emile Caiazza
Greg Foster
Al Escalante
Joe Thon

Page 81 of 187 1 2 79 80 81 82 83 186 187

Link Copied to Clipboard







Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4