Soccer vs. Lacrosse

[Anonymous]

SLAC ... Selective liberal arts college

Williams, Colby, Amherst, etc.

[Anonymous]

OP, if he only played three years of soccer before high school I am skeptical that he could play in college unless he's a true athletic standout. It's easier if he is a goalkeeper, because there are fewer of those available, but if he's in high school already and he hasn't had coaches talk to him about playing in college, I think it's not so likely that he'd find a good college with a good soccer team. He shouldn't pick a sport because of college. He should pick the one he likes to play more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, if he only played three years of soccer before high school I am skeptical that he could play in college unless he's a true athletic standout. It's easier if he is a goalkeeper, because there are fewer of those available, but if he's in high school already and he hasn't had coaches talk to him about playing in college, I think it's not so likely that he'd find a good college with a good soccer team. He shouldn't pick a sport because of college. He should pick the one he likes to play more.

+100

9-12 years old are actually the critical development years for ball skill in soccer. The footwork/skill is meticulous and a player will just never makeup ground if they start in middle school or later.

Lacrosse is a sport where they convert HS football players into spectacular lacrosse players. It is quite possible for a good athlete to pick it up later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if he only played three years of soccer before high school I am skeptical that he could play in college unless he's a true athletic standout. It's easier if he is a goalkeeper, because there are fewer of those available, but if he's in high school already and he hasn't had coaches talk to him about playing in college, I think it's not so likely that he'd find a good college with a good soccer team. He shouldn't pick a sport because of college. He should pick the one he likes to play more.

+100

9-12 years old are actually the critical development years for ball skill in soccer. The footwork/skill is meticulous and a player will just never makeup ground if they start in middle school or later.

Lacrosse is a sport where they convert HS football players into spectacular lacrosse players. It is quite possible for a good athlete to pick it up later.

Really? What are you basing these statements on when you have club lacrosse players that commit to colleges as early as 8th grade?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if he only played three years of soccer before high school I am skeptical that he could play in college unless he's a true athletic standout. It's easier if he is a goalkeeper, because there are fewer of those available, but if he's in high school already and he hasn't had coaches talk to him about playing in college, I think it's not so likely that he'd find a good college with a good soccer team. He shouldn't pick a sport because of college. He should pick the one he likes to play more.

+100

9-12 years old are actually the critical development years for ball skill in soccer. The footwork/skill is meticulous and a player will just never makeup ground if they start in middle school or later.

Lacrosse is a sport where they convert HS football players into spectacular lacrosse players. It is quite possible for a good athlete to pick it up later.

Really? What are you basing these statements on when you have club lacrosse players that commit to colleges as early as 8th grade?

Pp has no clue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SLAC ... Selective liberal arts college

Williams, Colby, Amherst, etc.

spot the colby grad - lol.

colby isn't even the best school its own state!

[Anonymous]

Do which ever he thinks will be more fun. Friends will be a key factor but sit him down and have a talk about pros and cons of both. Consider (a) odds of making team/varsity. Playing with friends might not be so much fun if they are on varsity and he is JV. (B) off season time commitments (c) coaches and their philosophy about playing time and their temperament.

Depending on how competitive the teams are and how gifted your kid is athletically it may be unlikely he will ever make varsity, but that should not stop him from playing and having fun.

As an aside - the interest in lacrosse might be based somewhat on his personal view on where he ranks with the soccer kids at school. A lot of this stuff depends on the school. He might be a top player at one school and a kid with no chance to make the team at another school.

Finally- from a future college app standpoint neither is likely to matter. What schools look for is a passion for something. They want will rounded and interesting entering classes - not so much interest in well rounded kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if he only played three years of soccer before high school I am skeptical that he could play in college unless he's a true athletic standout. It's easier if he is a goalkeeper, because there are fewer of those available, but if he's in high school already and he hasn't had coaches talk to him about playing in college, I think it's not so likely that he'd find a good college with a good soccer team. He shouldn't pick a sport because of college. He should pick the one he likes to play more.

+100

9-12 years old are actually the critical development years for ball skill in soccer. The footwork/skill is meticulous and a player will just never makeup ground if they start in middle school or later.

Lacrosse is a sport where they convert HS football players into spectacular lacrosse players. It is quite possible for a good athlete to pick it up later.

Really? What are you basing these statements on when you have club lacrosse players that commit to colleges as early as 8th grade?

Pp has no clue.

A good athlete is capable of picking up lacrosse in high school and be competitive. Soccer? Not so much.

It doesn't mean lacrosse is easier but it does mean that using your hands is easier to learn later than it is to learn using ones feet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if he only played three years of soccer before high school I am skeptical that he could play in college unless he's a true athletic standout. It's easier if he is a goalkeeper, because there are fewer of those available, but if he's in high school already and he hasn't had coaches talk to him about playing in college, I think it's not so likely that he'd find a good college with a good soccer team. He shouldn't pick a sport because of college. He should pick the one he likes to play more.

+100

9-12 years old are actually the critical development years for ball skill in soccer. The footwork/skill is meticulous and a player will just never makeup ground if they start in middle school or later.

Lacrosse is a sport where they convert HS football players into spectacular lacrosse players. It is quite possible for a good athlete to pick it up later.

Really? What are you basing these statements on when you have club lacrosse players that commit to colleges as early as 8th grade?

Pp has no clue.

A good athlete is capable of picking up lacrosse in high school and be competitive. Soccer? Not so much.

It doesn't mean lacrosse is easier but it does mean that using your hands is easier to learn later than it is to learn using ones feet.

+100

I did not think that would be so controversial. It is known that soccer foot-skill is incredibly hard to learn after the brain develops/sets. A player cannot do the things with the ball at his feet at a high rate of speed---or even to use both feet equally (critically important) if they don't start with a ball to middle school. Every world class player out there grew up as a child with a ball at his feet. Yes--you can get a kid to kick and run and be physical but that won't go far at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if he only played three years of soccer before high school I am skeptical that he could play in college unless he's a true athletic standout. It's easier if he is a goalkeeper, because there are fewer of those available, but if he's in high school already and he hasn't had coaches talk to him about playing in college, I think it's not so likely that he'd find a good college with a good soccer team. He shouldn't pick a sport because of college. He should pick the one he likes to play more.

+100

9-12 years old are actually the critical development years for ball skill in soccer. The footwork/skill is meticulous and a player will just never makeup ground if they start in middle school or later.

Lacrosse is a sport where they convert HS football players into spectacular lacrosse players. It is quite possible for a good athlete to pick it up later.

Really? What are you basing these statements on when you have club lacrosse players that commit to colleges as early as 8th grade?

Pp has no clue.

A good athlete is capable of picking up lacrosse in high school and be competitive. Soccer? Not so much.

It doesn't mean lacrosse is easier but it does mean that using your hands is easier to learn later than it is to learn using ones feet.

+100

I did not think that would be so controversial. It is known that soccer foot-skill is incredibly hard to learn after the brain develops/sets. A player cannot do the things with the ball at his feet at a high rate of speed---or even to use both feet equally (critically important) if they don't start with a ball to middle school. Every world class player out there grew up as a child with a ball at his feet. Yes--you can get a kid to kick and run and be physical but that won't go far at all.

Again, you have no clue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if he only played three years of soccer before high school I am skeptical that he could play in college unless he's a true athletic standout. It's easier if he is a goalkeeper, because there are fewer of those available, but if he's in high school already and he hasn't had coaches talk to him about playing in college, I think it's not so likely that he'd find a good college with a good soccer team. He shouldn't pick a sport because of college. He should pick the one he likes to play more.

+100

9-12 years old are actually the critical development years for ball skill in soccer. The footwork/skill is meticulous and a player will just never makeup ground if they start in middle school or later.

Lacrosse is a sport where they convert HS football players into spectacular lacrosse players. It is quite possible for a good athlete to pick it up later.

Really? What are you basing these statements on when you have club lacrosse players that commit to colleges as early as 8th grade?

Pp has no clue.

A good athlete is capable of picking up lacrosse in high school and be competitive. Soccer? Not so much.

It doesn't mean lacrosse is easier but it does mean that using your hands is easier to learn later than it is to learn using ones feet.

+100

I did not think that would be so controversial. It is known that soccer foot-skill is incredibly hard to learn after the brain develops/sets. A player cannot do the things with the ball at his feet at a high rate of speed---or even to use both feet equally (critically important) if they don't start with a ball to middle school. Every world class player out there grew up as a child with a ball at his feet. Yes--you can get a kid to kick and run and be physical but that won't go far at all.

Again, you have no clue.

Oh please, get over yourself. A athletic Freshman could pick up lacrosse and dedicate some serious training over two years and be a very capable and competitive player by their Junior and senior years with little or not lacrosse experience. That same athletic with the same two years of dedication to soccer would never catch up to their high school peers in soccer. The footwork is just to daunting.

Any kid who has played some baseball, tennis, basketball and some hockey have many of the perquisite skills to learn lacrosse quickly. The fact that the sport can be learned relatively quickly is a reason for its growing popularity.

But like chess, lacrosse is easy to learn, difficult to master.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if he only played three years of soccer before high school I am skeptical that he could play in college unless he's a true athletic standout. It's easier if he is a goalkeeper, because there are fewer of those available, but if he's in high school already and he hasn't had coaches talk to him about playing in college, I think it's not so likely that he'd find a good college with a good soccer team. He shouldn't pick a sport because of college. He should pick the one he likes to play more.

+100

9-12 years old are actually the critical development years for ball skill in soccer. The footwork/skill is meticulous and a player will just never makeup ground if they start in middle school or later.

Lacrosse is a sport where they convert HS football players into spectacular lacrosse players. It is quite possible for a good athlete to pick it up later.

Really? What are you basing these statements on when you have club lacrosse players that commit to colleges as early as 8th grade?

Pp has no clue.

A good athlete is capable of picking up lacrosse in high school and be competitive. Soccer? Not so much.

It doesn't mean lacrosse is easier but it does mean that using your hands is easier to learn later than it is to learn using ones feet.

+100

I did not think that would be so controversial. It is known that soccer foot-skill is incredibly hard to learn after the brain develops/sets. A player cannot do the things with the ball at his feet at a high rate of speed---or even to use both feet equally (critically important) if they don't start with a ball to middle school. Every world class player out there grew up as a child with a ball at his feet. Yes--you can get a kid to kick and run and be physical but that won't go far at all.

Again, you have no clue.

Oh please, get over yourself. A athletic Freshman could pick up lacrosse and dedicate some serious training over two years and be a very capable and competitive player by their Junior and senior years with little or not lacrosse experience. That same athletic with the same two years of dedication to soccer would never catch up to their high school peers in soccer. The footwork is just to daunting.

Any kid who has played some baseball, tennis, basketball and some hockey have many of the perquisite skills to learn lacrosse quickly. The fact that the sport can be learned relatively quickly is a reason for its growing popularity.

But like chess, lacrosse is easy to learn, difficult to master.

Agreed. Just like soccer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if he only played three years of soccer before high school I am skeptical that he could play in college unless he's a true athletic standout. It's easier if he is a goalkeeper, because there are fewer of those available, but if he's in high school already and he hasn't had coaches talk to him about playing in college, I think it's not so likely that he'd find a good college with a good soccer team. He shouldn't pick a sport because of college. He should pick the one he likes to play more.

+100

9-12 years old are actually the critical development years for ball skill in soccer. The footwork/skill is meticulous and a player will just never makeup ground if they start in middle school or later.

Lacrosse is a sport where they convert HS football players into spectacular lacrosse players. It is quite possible for a good athlete to pick it up later.

Really? What are you basing these statements on when you have club lacrosse players that commit to colleges as early as 8th grade?

Pp has no clue.

A good athlete is capable of picking up lacrosse in high school and be competitive. Soccer? Not so much.

It doesn't mean lacrosse is easier but it does mean that using your hands is easier to learn later than it is to learn using ones feet.

+100

I did not think that would be so controversial. It is known that soccer foot-skill is incredibly hard to learn after the brain develops/sets. A player cannot do the things with the ball at his feet at a high rate of speed---or even to use both feet equally (critically important) if they don't start with a ball to middle school. Every world class player out there grew up as a child with a ball at his feet. Yes--you can get a kid to kick and run and be physical but that won't go far at all.

Again, you have no clue.

Oh please, get over yourself. A athletic Freshman could pick up lacrosse and dedicate some serious training over two years and be a very capable and competitive player by their Junior and senior years with little or not lacrosse experience. That same athletic with the same two years of dedication to soccer would never catch up to their high school peers in soccer. The footwork is just to daunting.

Any kid who has played some baseball, tennis, basketball and some hockey have many of the perquisite skills to learn lacrosse quickly. The fact that the sport can be learned relatively quickly is a reason for its growing popularity.

But like chess, lacrosse is easy to learn, difficult to master.

Agreed. Just like soccer.

Ummmmm, not quite.

1. Soccer far outpaces lacrosse in sheer numbers of kids playing. The relative amount of competition is far greater in soccer than lacrosse.
2. Footskills are far harder to pick up later in life.
3. It is simply easier to learn skills with our hands than it is with our feet.

My only point is that a kid who had never played lacrosse before their freshman year could, within two years, crack a varsity roster. A kid who had never played soccer before their freshman year would not crack a varsity roster within two or possibly four years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if he only played three years of soccer before high school I am skeptical that he could play in college unless he's a true athletic standout. It's easier if he is a goalkeeper, because there are fewer of those available, but if he's in high school already and he hasn't had coaches talk to him about playing in college, I think it's not so likely that he'd find a good college with a good soccer team. He shouldn't pick a sport because of college. He should pick the one he likes to play more.

+100

9-12 years old are actually the critical development years for ball skill in soccer. The footwork/skill is meticulous and a player will just never makeup ground if they start in middle school or later.

Lacrosse is a sport where they convert HS football players into spectacular lacrosse players. It is quite possible for a good athlete to pick it up later.

Really? What are you basing these statements on when you have club lacrosse players that commit to colleges as early as 8th grade?

Pp has no clue.

A good athlete is capable of picking up lacrosse in high school and be competitive. Soccer? Not so much.

It doesn't mean lacrosse is easier but it does mean that using your hands is easier to learn later than it is to learn using ones feet.

+100

I did not think that would be so controversial. It is known that soccer foot-skill is incredibly hard to learn after the brain develops/sets. A player cannot do the things with the ball at his feet at a high rate of speed---or even to use both feet equally (critically important) if they don't start with a ball to middle school. Every world class player out there grew up as a child with a ball at his feet. Yes--you can get a kid to kick and run and be physical but that won't go far at all.

Again, you have no clue.

Oh please, get over yourself. A athletic Freshman could pick up lacrosse and dedicate some serious training over two years and be a very capable and competitive player by their Junior and senior years with little or not lacrosse experience. That same athletic with the same two years of dedication to soccer would never catch up to their high school peers in soccer. The footwork is just to daunting.

Any kid who has played some baseball, tennis, basketball and some hockey have many of the perquisite skills to learn lacrosse quickly. The fact that the sport can be learned relatively quickly is a reason for its growing popularity.

But like chess, lacrosse is easy to learn, difficult to master.

Agreed. Just like soccer.

Ummmmm, not quite.

1. Soccer far outpaces lacrosse in sheer numbers of kids playing. The relative amount of competition is far greater in soccer than lacrosse.
2. Footskills are far harder to pick up later in life.
3. It is simply easier to learn skills with our hands than it is with our feet.

My only point is that a kid who had never played lacrosse before their freshman year could, within two years, crack a varsity roster. A kid who had never played soccer before their freshman year would not crack a varsity roster within two or possibly four years.

If they had never played soccer before their freshman year, it is also unlikely that in this area, they would even crack a JV team by their Junior year.

[Anonymous]

Lacrosse coaches love to get former soccer players.