2028 Girls Lacrosse

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

I am aware of offers from top MD teams that were more about filling a gap than elite anything.

What team does your DD play on since you seem to be in the know on everything

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

Just curious, but how are you specifically aware of the reasons underlying multiple offers to top MD clubs. You don’t sound like a coach or are you just full of crap?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

I am aware of offers from top MD teams that were more about filling a gap than elite anything.

Just curious, but how are you specifically aware of the reasons underlying multiple offers to top MD clubs. You don’t sound like a coach or are you just full of crap?

There may just be a difference of opinion on what is considered elite talent. I'm not the OP, but I watch a lot of lacrosse at this level and I don't necessarily see that many elite players even on the top clubs - like a handful or less of elite players on each of the teams. I don't think it is correct to think that every player who is already on a top team, or makes a top team in 7th or 8th grade, is by default an elite player, though some probably are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

Just curious, but how are you specifically aware of the reasons underlying multiple offers to top MD clubs. You don’t sound like a coach or are you just full of crap?

The prior post said “you have to have elite size and speed, or combination”. I’m merely saying that that’s not necessarily the case. My view is informed by two offers to girls without size or “elite speed” that were offered in this cycle, that I personally know.

More broadly, I find the elite size and speed obsession—in a skill sport—limiting and erroneous. Even at the top of the D1 level, I can think of numerous examples of star players with neither. They are just damn good at lacrosse. No need to deter 13 year olds developing their game by telling them they can’t make it without specific genetic gifts. Certainly helps, but not the only way to get there.

So, not sure what I “sound like” to you, or why you seem frustrated, but I am sure of the points I offered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

Just curious, but how are you specifically aware of the reasons underlying multiple offers to top MD clubs. You don’t sound like a coach or are you just full of crap?

The prior post said “you have to have elite size and speed, or combination”. I’m merely saying that that’s not necessarily the case. My view is informed by two offers to girls without size or “elite speed” that were offered in this cycle, that I personally know.

More broadly, I find the elite size and speed obsession—in a skill sport—limiting and erroneous. Even at the top of the D1 level, I can think of numerous examples of star players with neither. They are just damn good at lacrosse. No need to deter 13 year olds developing their game by telling them they can’t make it without specific genetic gifts. Certainly helps, but not the only way to get there.

So, not sure what I “sound like” to you, or why you seem frustrated, but I am sure of the points I offered.

So, since you brought it up, which team made offers to fill a gap?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

Just curious, but how are you specifically aware of the reasons underlying multiple offers to top MD clubs. You don’t sound like a coach or are you just full of crap?

The prior post said “you have to have elite size and speed, or combination”. I’m merely saying that that’s not necessarily the case. My view is informed by two offers to girls without size or “elite speed” that were offered in this cycle, that I personally know.

More broadly, I find the elite size and speed obsession—in a skill sport—limiting and erroneous. Even at the top of the D1 level, I can think of numerous examples of star players with neither. They are just damn good at lacrosse. No need to deter 13 year olds developing their game by telling them they can’t make it without specific genetic gifts. Certainly helps, but not the only way to get there.

So, not sure what I “sound like” to you, or why you seem frustrated, but I am sure of the points I offered.

So, since you brought it up, which team made offers to fill a gap?

No big deal on the parsing of your understanding of “elite” but don’t be a douche and call out girls who got offers from top MD teams (there aren’t that many) by calling into question their speed etc. You try to cover your insult with a backhanded compliment but anyone can see it for what it is. And if you don’t think it is an insult, don’t hide behind an anonymous post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

Just curious, but how are you specifically aware of the reasons underlying multiple offers to top MD clubs. You don’t sound like a coach or are you just full of crap?

The prior post said “you have to have elite size and speed, or combination”. I’m merely saying that that’s not necessarily the case. My view is informed by two offers to girls without size or “elite speed” that were offered in this cycle, that I personally know.

More broadly, I find the elite size and speed obsession—in a skill sport—limiting and erroneous. Even at the top of the D1 level, I can think of numerous examples of star players with neither. They are just damn good at lacrosse. No need to deter 13 year olds developing their game by telling them they can’t make it without specific genetic gifts. Certainly helps, but not the only way to get there.

So, not sure what I “sound like” to you, or why you seem frustrated, but I am sure of the points I offered.

The combination of size, strength, and speed certainly helps. IMO if the NCAA adopts a 10v10 format the game will become more physical where size and speed will become a must. The UNCs, BCs, NWs of lacrosse will stack their rosters with players with these attributes. The proposed rules changes by Levy will not only take opportunities away from women, they will change the type of players recruited by the top programs. Let’s hope the rules committee does not adopt the proposed rules changes to ensure more girls continue to have opportunities to play in college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

Just curious, but how are you specifically aware of the reasons underlying multiple offers to top MD clubs. You don’t sound like a coach or are you just full of crap?

The prior post said “you have to have elite size and speed, or combination”. I’m merely saying that that’s not necessarily the case. My view is informed by two offers to girls without size or “elite speed” that were offered in this cycle, that I personally know.

More broadly, I find the elite size and speed obsession—in a skill sport—limiting and erroneous. Even at the top of the D1 level, I can think of numerous examples of star players with neither. They are just damn good at lacrosse. No need to deter 13 year olds developing their game by telling them they can’t make it without specific genetic gifts. Certainly helps, but not the only way to get there.

So, not sure what I “sound like” to you, or why you seem frustrated, but I am sure of the points I offered.

The combination of size, strength, and speed certainly helps. IMO if the NCAA adopts a 10v10 format the game will become more physical where size and speed will become a must. The UNCs, BCs, NWs of lacrosse will stack their rosters with players with these attributes. The proposed rules changes by Levy will not only take opportunities away from women, they will change the type of players recruited by the top programs. Let’s hope the rules committee does not adopt the proposed rules changes to ensure more girls continue to have opportunities to play in college.

Agreed, the idea alone of less field players seems completely backwards, which obviously will reduce roster size and end of day, lacrosse players in general.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

Just curious, but how are you specifically aware of the reasons underlying multiple offers to top MD clubs. You don’t sound like a coach or are you just full of crap?

The prior post said “you have to have elite size and speed, or combination”. I’m merely saying that that’s not necessarily the case. My view is informed by two offers to girls without size or “elite speed” that were offered in this cycle, that I personally know.

More broadly, I find the elite size and speed obsession—in a skill sport—limiting and erroneous. Even at the top of the D1 level, I can think of numerous examples of star players with neither. They are just damn good at lacrosse. No need to deter 13 year olds developing their game by telling them they can’t make it without specific genetic gifts. Certainly helps, but not the only way to get there.

So, not sure what I “sound like” to you, or why you seem frustrated, but I am sure of the points I offered.

The combination of size, strength, and speed certainly helps. IMO if the NCAA adopts a 10v10 format the game will become more physical where size and speed will become a must. The UNCs, BCs, NWs of lacrosse will stack their rosters with players with these attributes. The proposed rules changes by Levy will not only take opportunities away from women, they will change the type of players recruited by the top programs. Let’s hope the rules committee does not adopt the proposed rules changes to ensure more girls continue to have opportunities to play in college.

Agreed, the idea alone of less field players seems completely backwards, which obviously will reduce roster size and end of day, lacrosse players in general.

And with more open space as a result of fewer field players the need will exist to fill that space with size and speed.

If there are two less field players as a result of the proposed rules changes will this mean 4-6 fewer players per team. If so, this equates to roughly 500-700 fewer D1 offers per year to high school girls.

I don’t like the proposed changes for this and many other reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

Just curious, but how are you specifically aware of the reasons underlying multiple offers to top MD clubs. You don’t sound like a coach or are you just full of crap?

The prior post said “you have to have elite size and speed, or combination”. I’m merely saying that that’s not necessarily the case. My view is informed by two offers to girls without size or “elite speed” that were offered in this cycle, that I personally know.

More broadly, I find the elite size and speed obsession—in a skill sport—limiting and erroneous. Even at the top of the D1 level, I can think of numerous examples of star players with neither. They are just damn good at lacrosse. No need to deter 13 year olds developing their game by telling them they can’t make it without specific genetic gifts. Certainly helps, but not the only way to get there.

So, not sure what I “sound like” to you, or why you seem frustrated, but I am sure of the points I offered.

The combination of size, strength, and speed certainly helps. IMO if the NCAA adopts a 10v10 format the game will become more physical where size and speed will become a must. The UNCs, BCs, NWs of lacrosse will stack their rosters with players with these attributes. The proposed rules changes by Levy will not only take opportunities away from women, they will change the type of players recruited by the top programs. Let’s hope the rules committee does not adopt the proposed rules changes to ensure more girls continue to have opportunities to play in college.

Agreed, the idea alone of less field players seems completely backwards, which obviously will reduce roster size and end of day, lacrosse players in general.

And with more open space as a result of fewer field players the need will exist to fill that space with size and speed.

If there are two less field players as a result of the proposed rules changes will this mean 4-6 fewer players per team. If so, this equates to roughly 500-700 fewer D1 offers per year to high school girls.

I don’t like the proposed changes for this and many other reasons.

I agree with what you all are saying, so I’m not arguing. However…

The folks who made the recommendation believe that it will require more substitutions because the girls will be tired

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

Just curious, but how are you specifically aware of the reasons underlying multiple offers to top MD clubs. You don’t sound like a coach or are you just full of crap?

The prior post said “you have to have elite size and speed, or combination”. I’m merely saying that that’s not necessarily the case. My view is informed by two offers to girls without size or “elite speed” that were offered in this cycle, that I personally know.

More broadly, I find the elite size and speed obsession—in a skill sport—limiting and erroneous. Even at the top of the D1 level, I can think of numerous examples of star players with neither. They are just damn good at lacrosse. No need to deter 13 year olds developing their game by telling them they can’t make it without specific genetic gifts. Certainly helps, but not the only way to get there.

So, not sure what I “sound like” to you, or why you seem frustrated, but I am sure of the points I offered.

The combination of size, strength, and speed certainly helps. IMO if the NCAA adopts a 10v10 format the game will become more physical where size and speed will become a must. The UNCs, BCs, NWs of lacrosse will stack their rosters with players with these attributes. The proposed rules changes by Levy will not only take opportunities away from women, they will change the type of players recruited by the top programs. Let’s hope the rules committee does not adopt the proposed rules changes to ensure more girls continue to have opportunities to play in college.

Agreed, the idea alone of less field players seems completely backwards, which obviously will reduce roster size and end of day, lacrosse players in general.

And with more open space as a result of fewer field players the need will exist to fill that space with size and speed.

If there are two less field players as a result of the proposed rules changes will this mean 4-6 fewer players per team. If so, this equates to roughly 500-700 fewer D1 offers per year to high school girls.

I don’t like the proposed changes for this and many other reasons.

I agree with what you all are saying, so I’m not arguing. However…

The folks who made the recommendation believe that it will require more substitutions because the girls will be tired

If the change is just 3 behind the restraining line instead of 4, I don't initially see why any of the field players would be any more tired. Just seems like less opportunities on the field to me. If I am not thinking about this correctly, please help me understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

Just curious, but how are you specifically aware of the reasons underlying multiple offers to top MD clubs. You don’t sound like a coach or are you just full of crap?

The prior post said “you have to have elite size and speed, or combination”. I’m merely saying that that’s not necessarily the case. My view is informed by two offers to girls without size or “elite speed” that were offered in this cycle, that I personally know.

More broadly, I find the elite size and speed obsession—in a skill sport—limiting and erroneous. Even at the top of the D1 level, I can think of numerous examples of star players with neither. They are just damn good at lacrosse. No need to deter 13 year olds developing their game by telling them they can’t make it without specific genetic gifts. Certainly helps, but not the only way to get there.

So, not sure what I “sound like” to you, or why you seem frustrated, but I am sure of the points I offered.

The combination of size, strength, and speed certainly helps. IMO if the NCAA adopts a 10v10 format the game will become more physical where size and speed will become a must. The UNCs, BCs, NWs of lacrosse will stack their rosters with players with these attributes. The proposed rules changes by Levy will not only take opportunities away from women, they will change the type of players recruited by the top programs. Let’s hope the rules committee does not adopt the proposed rules changes to ensure more girls continue to have opportunities to play in college.

Agreed, the idea alone of less field players seems completely backwards, which obviously will reduce roster size and end of day, lacrosse players in general.

And with more open space as a result of fewer field players the need will exist to fill that space with size and speed.

If there are two less field players as a result of the proposed rules changes will this mean 4-6 fewer players per team. If so, this equates to roughly 500-700 fewer D1 offers per year to high school girls.

I don’t like the proposed changes for this and many other reasons.

I agree with what you all are saying, so I’m not arguing. However…

The folks who made the recommendation believe that it will require more substitutions because the girls will be tired

There are some you believe with 10v10 the girls game will be played more like the boys, meaning more substitutions. I’m not in this camp as I believe teams will continue to play their best players. They will certainly sub but not as much as may be hoped.

But assuming for the moment this does happen and the substitutions equate to having offensive and defensive specialists sub in the roll of the two-middie is lessened. You almost would not want to be a middie moving forward if you will be subbed in and out for specialists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

Just curious, but how are you specifically aware of the reasons underlying multiple offers to top MD clubs. You don’t sound like a coach or are you just full of crap?

The prior post said “you have to have elite size and speed, or combination”. I’m merely saying that that’s not necessarily the case. My view is informed by two offers to girls without size or “elite speed” that were offered in this cycle, that I personally know.

More broadly, I find the elite size and speed obsession—in a skill sport—limiting and erroneous. Even at the top of the D1 level, I can think of numerous examples of star players with neither. They are just damn good at lacrosse. No need to deter 13 year olds developing their game by telling them they can’t make it without specific genetic gifts. Certainly helps, but not the only way to get there.

So, not sure what I “sound like” to you, or why you seem frustrated, but I am sure of the points I offered.

So, since you brought it up, which team made offers to fill a gap?

No big deal on the parsing of your understanding of “elite” but don’t be a douche and call out girls who got offers from top MD teams (there aren’t that many) by calling into question their speed etc. You try to cover your insult with a backhanded compliment but anyone can see it for what it is. And if you don’t think it is an insult, don’t hide behind an anonymous post.

I am looking forward to the next steps on this thread after everyone starts drinking some wine tonight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time to move is after 7th grade. The longer you wait, the tougher it is.

Ugh, having buyer’s remorse. Oh well. Next year.

Why already?

Just feel like I missed the boat on a good MD team. Not saying my kid would make it just feel like I would’ve liked to see how she matched up in tryouts. Grass is always greener, tho.

Gets harder each year after 6th grade. The top clubs had 90-100 girls at tryouts and they are only looking to fill 2-5 spots depending on the team.

You have to have elite speed, size or combination to stand out

More on "speed and size". Let me offer a counterpoint. I know of multiple offers from top 5 MD teams to 2028s this year that certainly weren't based on size, and much more on elite skill, than speed. You also need to factor in head to head experience, camps or clinics, guest practices, etc. Agree a player can't just show up and make a team out of nowhere without some eye catching components to her game; I just think the speed and size talk is a bit overdone when there are multiple paths to get noticed, and definitely when discussing 13-year olds at the beginning, or in the middle, of growth spurts.

Just curious, but how are you specifically aware of the reasons underlying multiple offers to top MD clubs. You don’t sound like a coach or are you just full of crap?

The prior post said “you have to have elite size and speed, or combination”. I’m merely saying that that’s not necessarily the case. My view is informed by two offers to girls without size or “elite speed” that were offered in this cycle, that I personally know.

More broadly, I find the elite size and speed obsession—in a skill sport—limiting and erroneous. Even at the top of the D1 level, I can think of numerous examples of star players with neither. They are just damn good at lacrosse. No need to deter 13 year olds developing their game by telling them they can’t make it without specific genetic gifts. Certainly helps, but not the only way to get there.

So, not sure what I “sound like” to you, or why you seem frustrated, but I am sure of the points I offered.

So, since you brought it up, which team made offers to fill a gap?

No big deal on the parsing of your understanding of “elite” but don’t be a douche and call out girls who got offers from top MD teams (there aren’t that many) by calling into question their speed etc. You try to cover your insult with a backhanded compliment but anyone can see it for what it is. And if you don’t think it is an insult, don’t hide behind an anonymous post.

I am looking forward to the next steps on this thread after everyone starts drinking some wine tonight.

Saying "don’t hide behind an anonymous post" while posting anonymously on an anonymous forum is pure gold.

[Anonymous]

I’m sometimes wonder if I’m the only real human person on this site and all of the posts are AI, intended to amuse me.