Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
You know I think early recruiting is interesting. Do I wish my son was one of those early recruits? Absolutely if he really knew where he wanted to go and what he wanted to do in 9the grade. For some the decision is a no brainer when committing to schools like Duke, Hopkins, and all the other top 20 schools with D1 programs. You would be stupid not to jump at a chance to go to one of these schools if given the opportunity. My son and I are circumventing the treacherous recruiting road as I write this. We came into the travel lacrosse scene a bit late in 7th grade. So many teams had already been established and it was very tough to crack their top teams. We have played for some great teams only to see them cherry picked by other so called AA teams resulting in the team becoming weaker. If the parents just gave the team more time together rather than look for the AA team moniker the team could have competed with any one. We actually gave some AA teams a run in 1 or 2 goal games. The one thing I have learned and seen first hand that you need an advocate for your kid. I know so many quality players that are not committed and others who happened to play for a great team and an established coach get the early commitment. Many of these players were and still are some of the best players because they were a bit more mature and polished. This is because they were very well coached and played on great teams. While in 7th and 8th grade they really stood out physically and even skill wise. As 9th grade has come around many of the kids that were tall for their age or bigger in 6th-8th are now are average in both areas. Some are still bigger, taller and even better but not the full head and 25-30 pounds they had on others and blowing them away skills wise. I am happy my son and I are where we are in the process. I am seeing kids that at one time were so much better than others who were committed in 9th grade to top programs now being passed by. With puberty and a new found drive and work ethic kids are coming into their own mentally and physically and passing the so called can't miss players. I think that at this time my son is in the best possible position for him. Have a few schools he loves in D1 that also have shown interest back. We also have been introduced to a few schools we never would have considered before but are now very intrigued by. In 9th grade he would have never really known what he wants or if he could do it. It's not the end of the world for the parents or player if they aren't committed by 10th grade. I think certain coaches in D1 and club team directors are creating this frenzy. By the recent results many of these teams who have paved the way by committing 8th and 9th graders might be reconsidering listening to the club directors recommendations on can't miss 9th graders. Which I find hysterical to even type. Don't lose faith and stay the course. Good luck to all.


I agree with much of what you say but there are some things that I would like to point out.

Where are all of these late bloomers? If there are so many late bloomers out there then why do high school coaches bring up so many 9th graders? There is talk on another thread about Garden City, Massapeaqua, Syosset etc.. "the prestigious" programs bringing up a bunch of 9th graders. If there are so many late bloomers why the need to bring up the 9th graders. If college coaches can't tell who is going to develop down the road what make you think the HS coaches can? Is it possible that once the HS coach tags the kid as a can't miss (brings him up in 9th grade) the coach will continue to play the kid even if he doesn't pan out? Will the coach be able to admit he was wrong about the kid or will he just keep playing him?

From what I have seen first hand over the past few years Club Directors have very little influence on the college coaches. However, the club you play for has bas become more important. In recent years the top clubs have joined forces and they send their top teams to exclusive tournaments. Head coaches from the majority of Division 1 programs are all over these tournaments all summer and fall paying particular attention to the rising 9th and 10th graders. College coaches will watch a player multiple times before making an offer (they do not make the offer because the club director tells them to).

There is much talk about the "late bloomers" and where are they? The "late bloomer" is going to become extinct like the dinoaurs. Why is that? Because there is so much pressure to win at an early age on club teams, all the "early bloomers" are put on the A teams, regardless of their size. And when I say "early bloomer" I'm talking lax skill not physical size. A three foot eight kid who can sling it lefty will make the team all day long over a 4 foot four kid who is still trying to figure out what end of the stick to hold. So the tiny tyke plays with the best players and gets the best coaching. Fast forward to 8th grade and that A travel team is rolling, and some of the tiny tykes have monster stats. The team travels and college coaches start taking note. Now the potential "late bloomers" have been on B and C teams and the truth is, the club, the high school coaches and the college coaches could care less about them. So these players must either be at lesser public or private high schools to play and hopefully finally be coached. Now the top college coaches are falling over themselves to scoop up all the 9th grade (early bloomers) in the hopes that they hit the lottery and that player continues to develop, continues to grow, and continues to get good grades. Very few club coaches say, give me the best athlete and I will make him a great player. They say give me the best third grade lacrosse players and let the high school coach worry down the road. The only hope is that parity continues in the college ranks and the lesser D-1 schools make more informed decisions about more mature kids and start to compete with the early recruiters. But in the meantime, the moral of the story is, the train has left the station and the late bloomers have been left standing on the platform. In this fast paced, accelerated recruiting world, and the rise of the club teams, have your child up and running in second grade or find yourself chasing the early bloomers down the tracks.


You write this as if nothing ever changes in life. I could cite you examples as long as my arm of practices in all areas of life that were followed and later reversed. The only way early recruiting continues is if/when those teams that do it become unstoppable. Right now Notre Dame is the #1 team in the country and they actually have a reputatioins for poaching kids later. And you cannot go off 2 weeks of D1 results to proclaim parity or decide what it tells us about the long-term impact of early recruiting. The sample size just isn't big enought yet.


Not saying above is ideal. Saying it is what is happening. Parents aren't waiting for Notre Dame. They are jumping on Hopkins and Duke and the ripple effect is changing how parents operate regarding 9 year olds. I would much prefer the way it was 25 years ago. You know how many of us that played D-1 lacrosse and were recruited after 11th grade, say we would never play D-1 today? Lots. Do I hope that Notre Dame and Ohio State and others continue to poach players? Absolutely! By the way, my theory on why there are so many 5-9 attackman these days? Because no one is waiting until 11th grade and beyond to see who will actually grow. These little guys are not being discriminated against and are getting really good coaching at early ages, regardless of our their size. Add that to the rule changes and there is no longer a premium on size. The days of saying, oh, that kid is going to get killed out there are over. Not saying that it's bad. Just saying this is how the game has evolved. That diminishes a lot of the potential a "late bloomer" could bring into the equation. So yes, when the sample size expands and we have the benefit of time, we will see how it all shakes out. But I will say, most rational people would say that the recruiting of younger and younger kids is neither good for the game, not for the kids that we care so much about.