I am very familiar with boys youth lacrosse, hockey and soccer. Its very troubling, in my view, that the former does not have boys playing per their age. It is implemented in a sensible way for the later two sports, and works well. There is no reason why lacrosse could no copy soccer or hockey. I just don't understand the claim that $$ gets in the way. The people who run the tournaments will still get their fees, and the people who run the clubs will still get their tuition money. They will just form teams based on age. Directors can still recruit kids, win titles, and boast on their twitter accounts. Soccer and hockey clubs are still very aggressive with marketing and recruitment, and charge high tuition fees. The business model doesn't change much if age restrictions are implemented and enforced.

My son plays on a very good Town team at a grade level that is below middle school. Not on LI though. In order to minimize blow outs that don't help anyone other than our egos, we play some games "up", making sure its limited to just one grade above us. The size, speed and physicality difference from one year to the next is astronomical. An outstanding team at our grade level (us) is just 50/50 to win vs just an ordinary team one grade up. At the highest level of club lacrosse, where everyone is athletic, fast and skilled, there is simply no reason to have a younger team play an older team simply because the kids may be in the same grade.

If my son's team went into a time machine and played us last year, we would murder our last year selves. I don't see why this has to happen, figuratively, on the club circuit where teams are basically forced to play the next year version on themselves just because they are playing a team that has a ton of holdbacks or kids playing down.