STATS ON PLAYTIME OF FORMER Capital players in College?

[Anonymous]

Who does Capital talk about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read this and think to myself "thank god I don't have the worries of this person" - just want my kid to use the sport to get into a great school and have a great experience. If that means they never play so what

The objective of any athlete is to play the sport and dominate. No player is happy sitting on the bench, please stop with this cop out crap.

not the objective my "student-athlete" - you sound like you may be reliving your dreams through your kid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read this and think to myself "thank god I don't have the worries of this person" - just want my kid to use the sport to get into a great school and have a great experience. If that means they never play so what

I have a kid in a different D1 sport. They played the first 8 games of the season freshman year, then was inextricably benched the rest of the season. No explanation, nothing. It's horrible To say "so what," means you truly don't understand what these players give up in college to be on these teams. To give up all that and not play is almost pointless. In my kids case, they had a great sophomore season. We'll see what happens next. But not playing at all is pretty pointless. And the fact is, many of these Capital players do not play. It's great that there are a few here and there, but the majority are not. That's just a fact.

I understand it can be frustrating but you picked the school first right? Meaning you didn't just go to the school for lacrosse. If you used it as a means to egt into a school you may have had difficulty getting into without then I think your kid would still be thankful to be there and apart of the team regardless of playing time.

My daughter has always played her sport because she loves it and thrives on being competitive and playing hard. She never played with the goal of getting into a school she wouldn't have without it. That's just an odd reason to commit so much time to a sport. Did she have a goal of playing D1 in college? Yes. Again, to play--not just to get into a college she couldn't otherwise. I wonder if those who do think like that are the ones sitting out. It must be so much more draining to play a sport you're not that into and doing it only for college acceptance. Anyway, as i said, she played lots of time in every game sophomore year and is feeling good about the seasons ahead--at a top univesity. Would she have chosen that without her sport? Probably not honestly, but only because of location. But it checked all the other boxes and she loves it.

good for her. glad it worked out for her!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The relative lack of success of Capital players at the college level is partly the result of Capital's "fair play" system. Dominant players get approximately the same playing time as less dominant players. That helps with the development and recruiting of the less dominant players. In other clubs the less dominant player would not get as much time or development. But, that system can also hurt the team (through less wins) and the more dominant players b.c the more dominate player might not get as much playing time or accolades, which can impact player rankings etc. Those player rankings then impact allocated scholarship money, and consequently playing opportunities at the college level. It only makes sense for college coaches to give more playing opportunities to the players with the higher scholarship amounts. As Capital's recruiting success bears out, the fair play system works very well at getting significant numbers of commits to D1 program. Its not as great at allowing the most dominate players to shine as brightly (as compared to other clubs) which can lead to more buzz, higher rankings, scholarships & consequently college opportunities.

Teams for 27s were set and never changed. I watched Spring Fling and Capital Orange girls started on some of the top teams while Capital blue girls barely played or not at all. There’s no way the teams that were picked when girls were finishing 8th grade are still accurate. The model is flawed.

This is a silly argument. For some schools an orange girl might start because she’s the best girl they have at that position. For another school a blue girl might be in a position where she plays behind several older girls who are also on top teams. Different teams have different depths on their bench. Just because an orange girl on one team gets more playing time than a blue girl on another team, doesn’t mean the orange girl is better than the blue girl.

Exactly! So obvious that you cannot compare that. People just want to have something to tout. What a silly argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read this and think to myself "thank god I don't have the worries of this person" - just want my kid to use the sport to get into a great school and have a great experience. If that means they never play so what

I have a kid in a different D1 sport. They played the first 8 games of the season freshman year, then was inextricably benched the rest of the season. No explanation, nothing. It's horrible To say "so what," means you truly don't understand what these players give up in college to be on these teams. To give up all that and not play is almost pointless. In my kids case, they had a great sophomore season. We'll see what happens next. But not playing at all is pretty pointless. And the fact is, many of these Capital players do not play. It's great that there are a few here and there, but the majority are not. That's just a fact.

I understand it can be frustrating but you picked the school first right? Meaning you didn't just go to the school for lacrosse. If you used it as a means to egt into a school you may have had difficulty getting into without then I think your kid would still be thankful to be there and apart of the team regardless of playing time.

My daughter has always played her sport because she loves it and thrives on being competitive and playing hard. She never played with the goal of getting into a school she wouldn't have without it. That's just an odd reason to commit so much time to a sport. Did she have a goal of playing D1 in college? Yes. Again, to play--not just to get into a college she couldn't otherwise. I wonder if those who do think like that are the ones sitting out. It must be so much more draining to play a sport you're not that into and doing it only for college acceptance. Anyway, as i said, she played lots of time in every game sophomore year and is feeling good about the seasons ahead--at a top univesity. Would she have chosen that without her sport? Probably not honestly, but only because of location. But it checked all the other boxes and she loves it.

Different strokes. Some prioritize playing time. Some prioritize lacrosse ranking at expense of playing time. Some join great teams and don’t play initially, but overcome obstacles to earn their spot. Some prioritize education. Some find a balance of top 25 school, top 25 lacrosse and playing time. Some are fine riding the bench bec they view it as an athletic sorority experience. Some prioritize scholarship money. Whatever the decision, doesn’t matter. The second you say one is better than the other? That’s when you sound like a dick.

PREACH!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read this and think to myself "thank god I don't have the worries of this person" - just want my kid to use the sport to get into a great school and have a great experience. If that means they never play so what

I have a kid in a different D1 sport. They played the first 8 games of the season freshman year, then was inextricably benched the rest of the season. No explanation, nothing. It's horrible To say "so what," means you truly don't understand what these players give up in college to be on these teams. To give up all that and not play is almost pointless. In my kids case, they had a great sophomore season. We'll see what happens next. But not playing at all is pretty pointless. And the fact is, many of these Capital players do not play. It's great that there are a few here and there, but the majority are not. That's just a fact.

I understand it can be frustrating but you picked the school first right? Meaning you didn't just go to the school for lacrosse. If you used it as a means to egt into a school you may have had difficulty getting into without then I think your kid would still be thankful to be there and apart of the team regardless of playing time.

My daughter has always played her sport because she loves it and thrives on being competitive and playing hard. She never played with the goal of getting into a school she wouldn't have without it. That's just an odd reason to commit so much time to a sport. Did she have a goal of playing D1 in college? Yes. Again, to play--not just to get into a college she couldn't otherwise. I wonder if those who do think like that are the ones sitting out. It must be so much more draining to play a sport you're not that into and doing it only for college acceptance. Anyway, as i said, she played lots of time in every game sophomore year and is feeling good about the seasons ahead--at a top univesity. Would she have chosen that without her sport? Probably not honestly, but only because of location. But it checked all the other boxes and she loves it.

Different strokes. Some prioritize playing time. Some prioritize lacrosse ranking at expense of playing time. Some join great teams and don’t play initially, but overcome obstacles to earn their spot. Some prioritize education. Some find a balance of top 25 school, top 25 lacrosse and playing time. Some are fine riding the bench bec they view it as an athletic sorority experience. Some prioritize scholarship money. Whatever the decision, doesn’t matter. The second you say one is better than the other? That’s when you sound like a dick.

Typical BS DCite response -- we want somewhat equal outcomes. And if they aren't equal, it's what the family chose. If I understand the point of the post, it seems that the Capital's system is better for club at large, not necessarily the individual girl. Sound familiar?

This makes no sense. Poorly argued, whatever it is you’re trying to say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read this and think to myself "thank god I don't have the worries of this person" - just want my kid to use the sport to get into a great school and have a great experience. If that means they never play so what

I have a kid in a different D1 sport. They played the first 8 games of the season freshman year, then was inextricably benched the rest of the season. No explanation, nothing. It's horrible To say "so what," means you truly don't understand what these players give up in college to be on these teams. To give up all that and not play is almost pointless. In my kids case, they had a great sophomore season. We'll see what happens next. But not playing at all is pretty pointless. And the fact is, many of these Capital players do not play. It's great that there are a few here and there, but the majority are not. That's just a fact.

I understand it can be frustrating but you picked the school first right? Meaning you didn't just go to the school for lacrosse. If you used it as a means to egt into a school you may have had difficulty getting into without then I think your kid would still be thankful to be there and apart of the team regardless of playing time.

My daughter has always played her sport because she loves it and thrives on being competitive and playing hard. She never played with the goal of getting into a school she wouldn't have without it. That's just an odd reason to commit so much time to a sport. Did she have a goal of playing D1 in college? Yes. Again, to play--not just to get into a college she couldn't otherwise. I wonder if those who do think like that are the ones sitting out. It must be so much more draining to play a sport you're not that into and doing it only for college acceptance. Anyway, as i said, she played lots of time in every game sophomore year and is feeling good about the seasons ahead--at a top univesity. Would she have chosen that without her sport? Probably not honestly, but only because of location. But it checked all the other boxes and she loves it.

Different strokes. Some prioritize playing time. Some prioritize lacrosse ranking at expense of playing time. Some join great teams and don’t play initially, but overcome obstacles to earn their spot. Some prioritize education. Some find a balance of top 25 school, top 25 lacrosse and playing time. Some are fine riding the bench bec they view it as an athletic sorority experience. Some prioritize scholarship money. Whatever the decision, doesn’t matter. The second you say one is better than the other? That’s when you sound like a dick.

I don't know, I'd think the person using that kind of language toward fellow human beings is the dick here. But that's a lacrosee parent for you.

You realize you used the same word in assailing the PP; which makes you a d*ck, too, by your own definition. You really need to work harder at this.

[Anonymous]

Interesting capital used IG for the first time I’ve seen in close to a year trying to recruit coaches…

[Anonymous]

Capital freshman scored two goals for Denver today

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read this and think to myself "thank god I don't have the worries of this person" - just want my kid to use the sport to get into a great school and have a great experience. If that means they never play so what

I have a kid in a different D1 sport. They played the first 8 games of the season freshman year, then was inextricably benched the rest of the season. No explanation, nothing. It's horrible To say "so what," means you truly don't understand what these players give up in college to be on these teams. To give up all that and not play is almost pointless. In my kids case, they had a great sophomore season. We'll see what happens next. But not playing at all is pretty pointless. And the fact is, many of these Capital players do not play. It's great that there are a few here and there, but the majority are not. That's just a fact.

I understand it can be frustrating but you picked the school first right? Meaning you didn't just go to the school for lacrosse. If you used it as a means to egt into a school you may have had difficulty getting into without then I think your kid would still be thankful to be there and apart of the team regardless of playing time.

My daughter has always played her sport because she loves it and thrives on being competitive and playing hard. She never played with the goal of getting into a school she wouldn't have without it. That's just an odd reason to commit so much time to a sport. Did she have a goal of playing D1 in college? Yes. Again, to play--not just to get into a college she couldn't otherwise. I wonder if those who do think like that are the ones sitting out. It must be so much more draining to play a sport you're not that into and doing it only for college acceptance. Anyway, as i said, she played lots of time in every game sophomore year and is feeling good about the seasons ahead--at a top univesity. Would she have chosen that without her sport? Probably not honestly, but only because of location. But it checked all the other boxes and she loves it.

Different strokes. Some prioritize playing time. Some prioritize lacrosse ranking at expense of playing time. Some join great teams and don’t play initially, but overcome obstacles to earn their spot. Some prioritize education. Some find a balance of top 25 school, top 25 lacrosse and playing time. Some are fine riding the bench bec they view it as an athletic sorority experience. Some prioritize scholarship money. Whatever the decision, doesn’t matter. The second you say one is better than the other? That’s when you sound like a dick.

I don't know, I'd think the person using that kind of language toward fellow human beings is the dick here. But that's a lacrosee parent for you.

You realize you used the same word in assailing the PP; which makes you a d*ck, too, by your own definition. You really need to work harder at this.

Ah, I repeated the word, yes. But only to make a point. Can you not see a distinction?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Capital freshman scored two goals for Denver today

It was against Butler. Does that even count as a real game? Still congrats to Maggie I believe that is her 10th game she has seen the field this season with Denver.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Capital freshman scored two goals for Denver today

Awesome!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Capital freshman scored two goals for Denver today

It was against Butler. Does that even count as a real game? Still congrats to Maggie I believe that is her 10th game she has seen the field this season with Denver.

God could you please just F-off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who does Capital talk about?

have you ever met a Capital parent or player? Usually over the top, loud, lack any self-awareness or boundaries. They talk about themselves

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Capital freshman scored two goals for Denver today

this the kool-aid talking. 2 goals in a 21-3 win against terrible team. Good for her, but if g-time is what you are happy with so be it.