Langley School ("Little Langley") vs. Potomac - MCLEAN, VA

[Anonymous]

Now I'm confused. I can only contribute this about little Langley, where my kids went preschool through 2. It was a well rounded program, but we thought a little too babyish or girlish for boys. Maybe that is what the PP meant about gym. For example: noncompetitive field day. How can you have a noncompetitive field day? Why deprive the fastest kid in the class of the joy of bringing home the blue ribbon, especially when that might be the one thing at which he/she excels? Or the preschool "field day" that involved jump roping and Gymboree style parachutes -- the kindergarten boys (most of whom had been redshirted) were bored silly. Or the "friendly kickball" game where nobody was supposed to keep score, only you knew that ALL the kids were keeping score in their heads. It's not about preparing for college sports, but preparing for life by learning how to win graciously and to recover from losses. Not sure what that has to do with Potomac, about which I know nothing, but that was our Langley experience.

[Anonymous]

That sounds funny pp. I would bet the girls found it a bit lame too. A lot of schools (not just Langley) have let political correctness run amok. Kids aren't allowed to play anything like red rover or dodge ball anymore. Once they get out into the real world -- it will be quite a shock that no one is cheering them on anymore just for "participating"...go team!

Some of the posters on this thread don't seem to know much about athletics. Many seem to think skill at athletics or academics are mutually exclusive. They are not. Elite schools in this area can pick the 'cream of the crop' kids who excel at both sports and academics. It's the true model of the Olympian man (woman). I know at Princeton, for example, many of the kids are both stars at academics and sports. If a college can pick anyone they please -- why wouldn't they pick a "two-fer" who is good at multiple things and not just academics?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That sounds funny pp. I would bet the girls found it a bit lame too. A lot of schools (not just Langley) have let political correctness run amok. Kids aren't allowed to play anything like red rover or dodge ball anymore. Once they get out into the real world -- it will be quite a shock that no one is cheering them on anymore just for "participating"...go team!

Some of the posters on this thread don't seem to know much about athletics. Many seem to think skill at athletics or academics are mutually exclusive. They are not. Elite schools in this area can pick the 'cream of the crop' kids who excel at both sports and academics. It's the true model of the Olympian man (woman). I know at Princeton, for example, many of the kids are both stars at academics and sports. If a college can pick anyone they please -- why wouldn't they pick a "two-fer" who is good at multiple things and not just academics?

Very well said. You get the distinct impression from following many posts on this site (not this thread) that many look down on athletes. They don't seem to realize that you can absolutely have both top athletics and academics in one package. There are at least handful ot independent high schools that accomplish this.

[Anonymous]

I am a Potomac parent with kids in the lower and middle schools and I really appreciate the balance that the school makes among sports, academics like math and science, and the arts. I just returned from May Day -- the middle schoolers (4th-6th grades) spent this gorgeous afternoon singing traditional May Day songs and dancing around a May Pole. (The boys may grumble some about this, but they all do it!) There is more than just academics/athletics to evaluate at a school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again, it is all relative. No need to defend Potomac's record in their own conference or against similar level school outside of their conference. Potomac is very competitive against the schools that are in their conference (Flint Hill, Maret, Sidwell, etc.). They are not competitive against the Landons, Georgetown Preps, public schools, etc. There is nothing wrong with this for this is by the school's design. It is simply a matter of what the parents/student is looking for in terms of athletic excellence.

Landon and Georgetown Prep are single sex schools, so it's not an apples to apples comparison (Landon has 2x the number of boys to choose from for sports). Still, when these schools do play it's not exactly a mismatch (Potomac just beat Landon 6-1 yesterday in Boys Tennis).

If you really want to go back and look through all the records of out of conference play over the past 3 years, you will see that the school has a pretty decent win/loss record against the single sex schools, and even many public schools. (for example, Boys Soccer this year beat St. Albans & Wakefield High (public), Boys Lacrosse beat Dominion High (public), Girls Lacrosse beat NCS and Holton, Girls Softball beat NCS and Holton, etc)

Not trying to argue that top coed schools like Potomac & Sidwell are equal in team sports to the single sex or public schools - clearly those schools have more depth to pick from (for obvious reasons). But I think it's a disservice to suggest that the gap is all that big or that Potomac and Sidwell are "not competitive" with those schools. We should just let the scoreboard tell that story.

[Anonymous]

Why does everyone care so much which schools have the best sports teams? Why don't we ever hear, for example, which schools have the best debate teams, the best orchestras, or the best theater programs? I get that schools like kids who are good at more than just academics, but why on DCUM do people only talk about sports?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone care so much which schools have the best sports teams? Why don't we ever hear, for example, which schools have the best debate teams, the best orchestras, or the best theater programs? I get that schools like kids who are good at more than just academics, but why on DCUM do people only talk about sports?

Quick, which SEC universities have the best theater programs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, it is all relative. No need to defend Potomac's record in their own conference or against similar level school outside of their conference. Potomac is very competitive against the schools that are in their conference (Flint Hill, Maret, Sidwell, etc.). They are not competitive against the Landons, Georgetown Preps, public schools, etc. There is nothing wrong with this for this is by the school's design. It is simply a matter of what the parents/student is looking for in terms of athletic excellence.

Landon and Georgetown Prep are single sex schools, so it's not an apples to apples comparison (Landon has 2x the number of boys to choose from for sports). Still, when these schools do play it's not exactly a mismatch (Potomac just beat Landon 6-1 yesterday in Boys Tennis).

If you really want to go back and look through all the records of out of conference play over the past 3 years, you will see that the school has a pretty decent win/loss record against the single sex schools, and even many public schools. (for example, Boys Soccer this year beat St. Albans & Wakefield High (public), Boys Lacrosse beat Dominion High (public), Girls Lacrosse beat NCS and Holton, Girls Softball beat NCS and Holton, etc)

Not trying to argue that top coed schools like Potomac & Sidwell are equal in team sports to the single sex or public schools - clearly those schools have more depth to pick from (for obvious reasons). But I think it's a disservice to suggest that the gap is all that big or that Potomac and Sidwell are "not competitive" with those schools. We should just let the scoreboard tell that story.

Ok, let the scoreboard tell the story. Your assertion is just not true. There will always be exceptions, like the tennis score you referenced, but comprehensively, you will not find Potomac (and other MAC schools) competitive with the IAC, WAC, and other conferences. Again, this by design. Those schools place athletics on just a high plane as they do academics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone care so much which schools have the best sports teams? Why don't we ever hear, for example, which schools have the best debate teams, the best orchestras, or the best theater programs? I get that schools like kids who are good at more than just academics, but why on DCUM do people only talk about sports?

If you have to ask, you just don't get it (no offense meant). And I do disagree with you. Most of the dialogue on these boards is about academics discussions. Someone said it earlier when they referenced that they get the view that atletically-inclined schools or even students are looked down on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ok, let the scoreboard tell the story. Your assertion is just not true. There will always be exceptions, like the tennis score you referenced, but comprehensively, you will not find Potomac (and other MAC schools) competitive with the IAC, WAC, and other conferences. Again, this by design. Those schools place athletics on just a high plane as they do academics.

PP, you're not big on letting facts get in the way of a good story, huh?

First, you must just be talking about boys sports - as Potomac and Sidwell play in the ISL which includes NCS and Holton, and Sidwell and Potomac have their fair share of ISL championships.

As for boys sports, I've already conceded to you that the single sex schools (Landon, St Albans, Prep, etc) have the advantage given their numbers. And yes, in an all boys school you are naturally going to get more of a sports culture (these schools focus on the teacher/coach model). EVEN STILL, when you look at the head-to-head matchups of these schools in the last few years you find them pretty well balanced. That's also true for head-to-head records against teams like Bullis, SSSAS, Episcopal, Bishop Ireton, St Andrews, etc. If you want to challenge that, I suggest you post the records of the last few years across all sports and let the facts, rather than just your opinion, lead.

Not sure why you seem so bent on proving that top coed schools like Sidwell and Potomac are not committed to athletic excellence. You're just wrong... and you said yourself you don't have a kid there. So unless you show me the scoreboards, I'm going to choose to ignore those comments that are frankly insulting to the hundreds of talented student athletes at Sidwell and Potomac who stay after school EVERY DAY to give their best and compete for their programs. A very high percentage of students at these schools play multiple sports.

I for one think that Sidwell and Potomac strike the perfect balance between academic, athletic, artistic, community, and social excellence. It's why my family has so enjoyed the experience there.

(oh, and my Potomac son, who is currently on a Div I sports scholarship, would probably also agree)

[Anonymous]

I'm not impressed and I'm not swayed.

Yes, I am speaking of boys sports. No disrespect meant to the girls.

Here is the reality. Potomac very rarely plays the St. Albans, Landons, GPs in the major boys sports (football, basketball, lacrosse, baseball, wrestling, etc.) because frankly, they would get annihilated. I'm sorry you refuse to accept that. Any of the "balanced results" you are claiming, would be coming from the secondary boys sports. The Potomac AD, who is a great guy, knows this better than anyone.

While you are speaking from the vantage of a "D1 athlete's parent", I am speaking from the vantage point of a son who specifically is not attending Potomac because, among other reasons suited for him, they have a less than top tier sports program. Again, this is on a relative basis.

Potomac is an excellent academic school, with a nice athletics program. But there are a handful of local independent schools with excellent academics and excellent athletics. I mean no discredit to Potomac. Try attending a Landon lacrosse game versus a Potomac one, just as one example. The differences are huge.

[Anonymous]

I think I remember from the matriculation stats on another thread that Potomac does rather better than Landon in terms of NMSF, SAT scores, and college placement. So maybe for Potomac families, Landon's academics would be "nice," as you put it, but not good enough, just as Potomac's lacrosse program is "nice," but not good enough for you. It all depends on your priorities. Not a Potomac parent here, BTW.

[Anonymous]

Here is the net of it:
The academics of the Landons, St. Albans, GP, etc. are at a higher level than the athletics of the Potomacs, Sidwells, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is the net of it:
The academics of the Landons, St. Albans, GP, etc. are at a higher level than the athletics of the Potomacs, Sidwells, etc.

You're clearly very insecure about something to feel that you have to put down another schools so much. I wish you and your son well at your chosen school. Our family has been thrilled with both the athletics and academics our school choice (Potomac), and feel no need to try and disrespect another. Cheers.

[Anonymous]

It is very amusing to me how a post originally discussing the differences between Potomac and Little Langley now seems to focus entirely upon athletics. Seriously?! I simply want my child to get into these schools, succeed in a competitive academic atmosphere, and enjoy school and their friends. A great education is key and it seems both schools will provide my child with such.