You can't spell "lacrosse" without SLACs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol. You cannot find anything whiter than the Williams College lacrosse roster. They've even got a guy- I am not making this up- named Wyatt Cotton!

https://ephsports.williams.edu/sports/mens-lacrosse/roster

LOL. Two light skinned black guys and that's it. And they went to Delbarton so is highly likely to be a jerky d-bag.

Amazing how a tiny school like Williams fills up a huge percentage of the male spots in their class with football, hockey and lax. Roughly 1000 men at Williams and probably 125 (or more) from those three sports. Throw in baseball (slightly more diverse but also not known for being full of intellects, though I'm sure there are some who are very bright) and you are well over 15% of the men in the school. And I guarantee you that not one of these kids will play these sports at any competitive level for a day after they graduate.

WTH is wrong with you talking about these kids like that? You don't know anything about them.

You have problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Terrible post. I am from a low income area with 100% minority kids and lacrosse has been great for us. Literally a game changer. Maybe they don't go to SLACs, but lots of D3 college scholarships for kids who really need them.

But stay in your world and pretend you're the one who doesn't get enough privilege.

Div. 3 does not give scholarships. So these kids you are referring to “who really need them” will get financial aid or merit aid without lacrosse. What you think is a “game changer” is you justifying affirmative action for whites.

It is actually affirmative action for white jocks. And since most of these schools are tripping over themselves to show their DEI street cred and have good percentages of minorities, it means no seats left for non-athlete whites. I know that no one is playing their violin for this group but this was not the goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Terrible post. I am from a low income area with 100% minority kids and lacrosse has been great for us. Literally a game changer. Maybe they don't go to SLACs, but lots of D3 college scholarships for kids who really need them.

But stay in your world and pretend you're the one who doesn't get enough privilege.

"According to the NCAA Student Athlete Race/Ethnicity Report (NCAA, 2010), white athletes made up 91.4 percent for male lacrosse players and 90.6 percent of female players. Black athletes, however, made up just 2.2 percent of male athletes and 2.4 percent of female participants at the Division-I level. Less than 10 percent of the student-athletes playing NCAA lacrosse were black. That statistic carries over to both men's and women's lacrosse in all three divisions (Ricardi, 2011)."

https://scholarworks.moreheadstate.edu/msu_faculty_research/309/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Terrible post. I am from a low income area with 100% minority kids and lacrosse has been great for us. Literally a game changer. Maybe they don't go to SLACs, but lots of D3 college scholarships for kids who really need them.

But stay in your world and pretend you're the one who doesn't get enough privilege.

Div. 3 does not give scholarships. So these kids you are referring to “who really need them” will get financial aid or merit aid without lacrosse. What you think is a “game changer” is you justifying affirmative action for whites.

It is actually affirmative action for white jocks. And since most of these schools are tripping over themselves to show their DEI street cred and have good percentages of minorities, it means no seats left for non-athlete whites. I know that no one is playing their violin for this group but this was not the goal.

Yes, you are right. It is affirmative action for white jocks. SLACs that want diversity get only one kind of white kid. But that ain’t the world.

[Anonymous]

I'm sorry your mediocre white son isn't smart enough to be admitted based on merit.

[Anonymous]

If anything, ice hockey is worse than lacrosse. Pretty much a 1950s country club look for the ice hockey team at ultra-woke Middlebury:

https://athletics.middlebury.edu/sports/mhockey/roster

[Anonymous]

Football and baseball are much better as these sports are actually played by most Americans, unlike the highly prep-school specific sports of lacrosse, ice hockey, sailing, squash, fencing etc.

As affirmative action for white dudes goes, however, lacrosse and ice hockey are by far the worst offenders given the large size of the teams and their extreme whiteness and economic exclusivity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If anything, ice hockey is worse than lacrosse. Pretty much a 1950s country club look for the ice hockey team at ultra-woke Middlebury:

https://athletics.middlebury.edu/sports/mhockey/roster

How to showcase your ignorance: calling Middlebury ultra-woke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry your mediocre white son isn't smart enough to be admitted based on merit.

How many white slots are available at these schools in each class for non-first gen, non-legacy, non-geographic diversity, non-big donor potential or famous parents whites? I’ll give you a high-low on 25 out of an incoming class of 500. Merit is not the issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Football and baseball are much better as these sports are actually played by most Americans, unlike the highly prep-school specific sports of lacrosse, ice hockey, sailing, squash, fencing etc.

As affirmative action for white dudes goes, however, lacrosse and ice hockey are by far the worst offenders given the large size of the teams and their extreme whiteness and economic exclusivity.

Correct about hockey. Lacrosse is gradually getting more diverse - there have been a number of high profile black players. Squash has tons of international players, particularly India/Middle East, so is not just rich white kids. Fencing (and to a lesser extent squash) has become a favorite of Asian tiger moms who think it will get their kid into top schools. Squash requires more natural athletic ability than fencing so is more challenging for the kids who are total klutzes.

It is sad that baseball has become a lot less diverse. Now it is all rich white suburban kids with multiple super expensive bats and gloves playing on numerous traveling teams with their dumb wrap-around sunglasses on the brims of their hats. Jackie Robinson is rolling over in his grave.

[Anonymous]

lacrosse is specifically designed for the non-athletic wealthy white kid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:lacrosse is specifically designed for the non-athletic wealthy white kid

And don't forget field hockey for the non-athletic wealthy white ladies!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:lacrosse is specifically designed for the non-athletic wealthy white kid

Clearly you have never played lacrosse. Athleticism is required. It is not an easy game. And the boys game can be quite physical. Girls is more focused on speed.

There are so many self-proclaimed experts here who have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lacrosse is specifically designed for the non-athletic wealthy white kid

And don't forget field hockey for the non-athletic wealthy white ladies!

I don't have a dog in this fight -- my kid is not sporty at all -- but I find it hard to believe there's no skill to Lacrosse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Football and baseball are much better as these sports are actually played by most Americans, unlike the highly prep-school specific sports of lacrosse, ice hockey, sailing, squash, fencing etc.

As affirmative action for white dudes goes, however, lacrosse and ice hockey are by far the worst offenders given the large size of the teams and their extreme whiteness and economic exclusivity.

Don't forget about rowing/crew. Only white and/or rich need apply here.

https://goprincetontigers.com/sports/mens-rowing/roster